TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (4) TMI 540
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....T(A)"] dated 07.12.2021 vide Appeal No.CIT(A), Kolkata-4/10113/2017- 18 which is arising out of the assessment order framed u/s 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the "Act") dated 30.06.2017 by DCIT, Circle- 10(1), Kolkata. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds: "1. That, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. C.I.T.(A) erred in law in having upheld the disallowance/addition of sales-tax liability of Rs. 12,32,290/- claimed in the A.Y. 2013-14 under appeal without considering that the said liability payable was considered and finalized in the scrutiny assessment made u/s 143(3) of the Act and the Ld. A.O. disallowed the same very liability vide subsequent order ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....enses under a genuine doubt as to its liability and in no way there was any escapement of income-tax inasmuch as it was just paying of income-tax in earlier years and taking the deduction later. 5. That, the Ld. C.I.T.(A) erred in not entertaining the credit of DDT amounting to Rs. 4,79,157/-on the alleged ground that the payment pertained to A.Y. 2014-15 without considering the fact that the credit of DDT of Rs. 4,79,157/- admittedly paid on 26.06.2013 for the dividend declared and paid for the A.Y. 2013-14 has not been allowed despite filing a petition u/s 154 against the assessment order u/s 143(3) of the Act for A.Y. 2013-14. 6. That, as the order of Ld. C.I.T.(A) on the above issues suffer from illegality and is devoi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hough it was claimed by the assessee that the said expenditure has been claimed as per the provisions of Section 43B of the Act, but the assessee did not get any favour from the ld. AO. Thereafter, the assessee carried the matter to the ld. CIT(A) but could not succeed. 6. We, further observe that the ld. AO has not disputed the fact that the payment of sales tax liability has been made by the assessee during the year under appeal at Rs. 12,32,290/- which comprises of the sales tax liability for AY 2005-06 at Rs. 5,59,386/- and of Rs. 6,72,904/- for AY 2010-11. The assessee has made this claim under the provisions of Section 43B of the Act. 7. Relevant part of Section 43B of the Act reads as under: "Notwithstanding anything c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sum payable by the assessee as an employer in lieu of any leave at the credit of his employee, or (g) any sum payable by the assessee to the Indian Railways for the use of railway assets, shall be allowed (irrespective of the previous year in which the liability to pay such sum was incurred by the assessee according to the method of accounting regularly employed by him) only in computing the income referred to in section 28 of that previous year in which such sum is actually paid by him: Provided that nothing contained in this section shall apply in relation to any sum which is actually paid by the assessee on or before the due date applicable in his case for furnishing the return of income under sub-section (1) o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tive of the previous year in which the liability to pay such sum was incurred by the assessee according to the method of accounting regularly employed. Only exception to this is the payments which have not been paid during a particular financial year but paid before the due date of furnishing the return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act and in such cases the amount paid can be claimed as expenditure in the income tax return. 10. Now, going through the facts of the case, we find that the year under appeal is AY 2013-14. The alleged amount pertains to AY 2005-06 and AY 2010-11 and such liability did not exist at that point of time and, therefore, there was no possibility to make the payment during the relevant assessment year or before the d....