TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1978 (12) TMI 44
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... delivered by SATISH CHANDRA C.J.-The assessee claimed an allowance on account of liability for gratuity payable to workmen. It was claimed that this was a statutory liability under s. 3 of the Industrial Disputes Act read with the Sugar Industries Workmen Gratuity Scheme. This claim was made before the ITO on account of the gratuity payable for the previous year and earlier years in terms of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n the light of the scheme and the provisions of the Act. It was also noticed that the company itself had not made provision in the relevant accounts for the assessment year in question, namely, 1973-74. The entire argument was based on the actuarial report which was made in May, 1973. On these findings, the Tribunal refused to entertain the claim at that stage. The Tribunal has, at the instance....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....peal must have been heard by the Tribunal some time before that. This court in Madho Mahesh Sugar Mills (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [1973] 92 ITR 503, decided on August 4, 1972, held that though no part of the gratuity may have been payable by the assessee in any of the earlier years, the past services of the employees have to be taken into account merely to arrive at the quantum of the liability which becam....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t reagitated before the AAC. That ground has not been sought to be reagitated before the Tribunal either. The claim for deduction of liability for gratuity was sought to be sustained on a different ground before the Tribunal. Originally the ground related to the liability under the Wage Board Award. Before the Tribunal the ground was in line with the decision of this court in Madho Mahesh Sugar Mi....