Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2018 (6) TMI 897

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nce upon a judicial authority which is completely distinct in facts. 2. Because, the Id. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding the disallowance of expenses of Rs..1,00,640/- although complete explanation in that regard was placed on record. 3. Because, the Id. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in disallowing the expenses of Rs..25,38,533/- allowed as discount to one of its debtors which was in the nature of write off of debt since the debtor had gone into liquidation. 4. Because, the Id. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in granting only partial relief in respect of the addition of Rs..21,56,984/- u/s 40(a)(i) of the Act by referring to AO for verification although all relevant material was already on record". 3. In so far as Ground No. 1 &.2 i.e. the addition made u/s. 41(1) of the Act is concerned the Assessing Officer after going through the balance sheet of the assessee noticed that assessee has shown liability of Rs..75,82,362/- as payable to M/s. Camy Plant, the assessee was required to furnish the confirmations from the creditors and also required to explain as to why the same should not be treated as cessation of liability u/s....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....to M/s Sidem, Paris but M/s Sidem has not given payment to next in loop i.e. M/s Flo-Dyne Limited, UK. vi) In these circumstances, a rebate of 20% of the order amount i.e. Rs..25,36,720/- was granted to M/s. Flo-Dyne Limited, UK. 6. Learned Counsel for the assessee further submitted that in view of the delay, the payment to M/s Camy Plant was halted to renegotiate the amount payable in view of the loss suffered by the assessee because of delay by M/s Camy Plant. M/s Camy Plant has issued legal notice to the assessee in this regard. It is submitted that the relevant documentary evidences showing job done by M/s Camy Plant are attached in the paper book. Learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that confirmation could not be obtained because of the ongoing dispute because of which the creditor is not co-operating. A Liability acknowledged by the assessee as payable in Balance Sheet cannot be considered as cessation where the creditor has not waived off the amount. 7. Ld. Counsel for the assessee in support of the above contentions placed reliance on the following decisions: - (i) CIT v. Smt Sita Devi Juneja in ITA.No. 619/2009 Punjab and Haryana High Court. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....iled appeal, which has been dismissed by the ITAT, while observing as under: - "It was for the AO to show that the liabilities in question had ceased to exist. In fact, these liabilities were payable to the assessee and unless demonstrated, they were to be shown as outstanding. These liabilities were appearing in the assessee's balance-sheet, indication acknowledgment of the debts payable by the assessee, as has been held in "CIT v. Tamil Nadu Warehousing Corpn." 292 ITR 310 (Mad), and "Ambika Mills Ltd. v. CIT" 54 ITR 167 (Guj.). As such, these liabilities could not have been treated to have ceased and so, invocation of the provisions of Section 41 (1) was not at all called for. Moreover, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Sugauli Sugar Works v. CIT" 236 ITR 518 (SC), the cessation of the liability can come about only by a bilateral act and not unilateral act. In the present case, the assessee treated the liability as existing. Further, section 41 (1) of the Act provides for a deeming fiction, as per which an amount not having the nature of income is treated as income. That being so, the burden of proving the fiction is in the department. Sans the dischargin....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....btained by the assessee concerning such trading liability by way of remission or cessation thereof during the concerned year. Thus, there did not accrue any benefit to the assessee which could be deemed to be the profit or gain of the assessee's business, which would otherwise not be the assessee's income. It has been further found as fact that the assessee had filed the copies of accounts of sundry creditors signed by the concerned creditors. In view of this fact, in our opinion, the ITAT has rightly come to the conclusion that confirmation from the creditors were produced." 10. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Sugauli Sugar Works (P.) Ltd. (supra) while dismissing he appeal of the Revenue held as under: - "7. One aspect of the matter has been completely ignored by the judgment of the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court. As pointed out already, the crucial words in the Section require that the assessee has to obtain in cash or in any other manner some benefit. That part of the Section has been omitted to be considered by the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court. The said words have been considered by a Full Bench of Gujarat High Court ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....by the creditor. It is not in dispute, and it indeed cannot be disputed, that it is not a case or remission of liability. Similarly, a unilateral act on the part of the debtor cannot bring about a cessation of his liability. The cessation of the liability may occur either by reason of the operation of law, i.e., on the liability becoming unenforceable at law by the creditor and the debtor declaring unequivocally his intention not to honour his liability when payment is demanded by the creditor, or a contract between the parties or by discharge of the debt - the debtor making payment thereof to his creditor. Transfer of an entry is neither an agreement between the parties nor payment of the liability......."(at page 41) 9. This judgment has been quoted by the High Court in the present case and followed. We have no hesitation to say that the reasoning is correct and we agree with the same. 10. The principle that expiry of period of limitation prescribed under the Limitation Act could not extinguish the debt but it would only prevent the creditor from enforcing the debt, has been well settled. It is enough to refer to the decision of Court in Bombay Dyeing & Manufact....