TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (8) TMI 1471
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....I.T. Act amounting to Rs. 43,99,905; (ii) belated payment of employees' contribution to PF & ESI amounting to Rs. 27,220. We shall adjudicate the issues as under: Freezer Deposit considered as lapsed liability u/s 41(1) of the I.T. Act amounting to Rs. 43,99,905 3. As regards the above issue, the assessee is a private limited company engaged in the manufacture of Ice-cream and frozen foods. The Assessing Officer had added a sum of Rs. 43,99,905 u/s 41(1) of the I.T. Act in respect of freezer deposit on proportionate basis as lapsed liability. The view taken by the A.O. was confirmed by the CIT(A). 4. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. The learned AR submitted that the issue in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....case of M/s. Kreem Foods (P) Ltd. In ITA No. 597/Coch/2010 relating to assessment year 2007-08:- "3. At the time of hearing, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted a copy of the order dated 25-05-2012 passed by this Bench in the case of Jojo Frozen Food (P) Ltd. and Cream Packs (P) Ltd. in I.T.A. Nos. 655 & 654/Coch/2010 wherein the Tribunal has considered an identical issue and decided the same in favour of the assessee. For the sake of convenience, we extract below the operative portion of the said order in respect of the above said issue. "6. We have considered the rival submissions and carefully perused the record. We have also gone through the copy of the order passed by the co-ordinate bench of the Tribunal ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... under the Income-tax provisions which is a settled law. In other words, there must be a debt owned to the assessee and until this is created in favour of the assessee as a debt due to the assessee, it cannot be said as income accrued. Hence, the decision relied by the Jr. D.R. in the case of CIT vs. T.V. Sundaram Iyengar and Sons cited supra, is clearly distinguishable on facts. In that case, assessee itself admitted this as income as per the book entries. Hence, it is distinguishable. The decision relied by the ld. counsel for the assessee in the case of CIT vs. Realest Builders and Services Ltd. - 307 ITR 202 (SC) in addition to the following cases - (a) Siddheswar Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. vs. CIT & Others - 270 IT....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....that the appeal was filed against the order of the Tribunal and the same is pending before the High Court. But on a query from the Bench, the Ld. DR submitted that he does not have knowledge of any stay granted by the Hon'ble High Court on the operation of the earlier order of the Tribunal. Since the Ld. CIT(A) has followed the order of the Tribunal, we are of the considered opinion that mere pending of the appeal before the High Court against the order of the Tribunal cannot be a reason to take a different view. Therefore, by following the order of the Tribunal for the earlier assessment year, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the deposits collected by the assessee for freezer cannot be considered as income of the assessee. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....for not making payments within the due date prescribed under the relevant Acts. 9. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal before the first appellate authority. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 10. Aggrieved, the assessee has filed the present appeal before the Tribunal. The learned AR relied on the submissions made before the Income Tax Authorities. 11. The learned Departmental Representative submitted that the issue in question is squarely covered by the judgment of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Merchem Limited (supra) and in the case of Popular Vehicles & Services Private Limited v. CIT (supra). 12. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The asses....