2018 (2) TMI 1463

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ng Counsel.   Respondent Through: Ms. Rashmi Chopra and Mr. Amit Shrivastava, Advocates.   O R D E R This appeal by the Revenue challenges the findings of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'ITAT'), and urges two grounds; firstly, whether the remission of liability was correctly brought to tax under Section 41(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereina....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....8,194/- under Section 10A of the Act with reference to Explanation 2(iv) of the Act. The CIT(A) granted relief to the assessee on both counts. In doing so, the CIT(A) applied the judgment of Bombay High Court passed in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Sulzer India Limited, (2014) 369 ITR 717 (Bom) which had held that the disallowance of the kind made under Section 41(1) of the Act was....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed the collection of sales tax but deferred the payment by 12 years. The assessee, like in the case of Sulzer India Limited (supra), approached for a pre-deposit, which was permitted. In the circumstances, it was held that Section 41(1) of the Act does not apply. On an application of the principles approved in the case of M/s Balkrishna Industries (supra), the Court is of the opinion that no quest....