2000 (7) TMI 997

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....DER 1. At the instance of the revenue, the following questions have been referred for opinion of this Court under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') by the Delhi Bench 'B'. "1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in allowing deduction of the additional sales tax liability of Rs. 2,58,032 as per the sales tax ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ents made for the assessment year 1957-58 on 12th March, 1962, he filed copies of sales tax orders one under rule 41(5) and the other under rule 51(5) read with section 9(3) of the Central Sales tax Act both dated 11th March, 1962, he pointed out that as per the order under rule 51(9), an additional demand of Rs. 66,964 was raised and by the second order an additional demand of Rs. 1,91,068 was si....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the liability for payment of which was admittedly settled after a dispute by the orders of the U.P. Government (Labour Department) dated May 1, 1962 as referred to by the AAC in para 10 of his order. The AAC has disallowed this claim on the ground that the date of order fell after the date of dissolution of the partnership and the liabilities unitwise had been taken by the erstwhile partners with....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... had accrued, undisputedly under the U.P. Government (Labour Department) order dated 1st May, 1962. Accordingly, we allow this contention." 5. Issue similar to one involved in the first question has come up for consideration of various High Courts and the Apex Court. In view of the decision of the Apex Court in Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 363 , the question has to be answe....