2019 (3) TMI 1109

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....acts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in ignoring that the appellant had voluntarily offered to tax the liabilities due to Mr. Abhishek Bachchan and Mr. Amitabh Bachchan in assessment year 2004-05 when the liabilities became time barred? (iii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the order of the Tribunal is perverse as the Tribunal failed to appreciate the fact that no liability was created nor any deduction of expenses claimed in respect of Rs. 6,00,000/- which given for safe custody to Mr. Ram Mukherjee and which formed part of the appellant's cash balance? 2. By an order dated 12.2.2019, this Court had rejected the Question No. 3 but in relation to Que....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....l rejected the assessee's claim. The Tribunal while rejecting the assessee's appeal noted that upon completion of limitation period, the assessee had in the assessment year 2004-05 offered such income to tax on the ground that the liability can be stated to have been ceased. The Tribunal, therefore, believed that the Revenue cannot tax the income twice and directed the Revenue to collect the tax only in one year and the Revenue should have kept the tax for the later year in abeyance. 4. Question No. (ii) arises in the same and similar background. The assessee claimed that Glaxo, a company had shown desire to advertise its Asthma drug by utilizing photograph of Mr. Amitabh Bachchan for which agreed payment of Rs. 5 Lacs would b....