Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2017 (9) TMI 2040

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he judgment and order of the Tribunal whereby the Tribunal has dismissed the appeals of the department. 2. Though served none appeared for the respondent. 3. This Court while admitting the matters framed the following substantial questions of law:- In DBITA No. 68/2015 "1. Whether the Tribunal was legally justified in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 47,17,143/- provided for contractual obligation in the return which was not allowable being contingent/unascertainable liability?" 2. Whether the Tribunal was legally justified in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 3,39,38290/- made on account of employees contribution to provident fund specifically when the amount claimed was not deposited in prescribed time thus....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....laimed was not deposited in prescribed time and also included claim for the earlier Assessment Year thus being contrary to the provisions of section 43B and 36(1)(va), 2(24) (x)." In DBITA No.179/2016 "Whether the Tribunal was legally justified in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 8,76,34,111/- made on account of employees contribution to provident fund specifically when the amount claimed was not deposited in prescribed time thus being contrary to the provisions of section 43B and 36(1)(va), 2(24)(x)." In DBITA No. 105/2015 "Whether the Tribunal was legally justified in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 6,45,57,068/- made on account of employees contribution to provident fund specifically when the amount c....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....normal rule. It would depend on the nature of the business, the nature of sales the nature of the product manufactured and sold and the scientific method of accounting adopted by the assessee. It would also depend upon the historical trend and upon the number of articles produced. A provision is a liability which can be measured only by using a substantial degree of estimation.  A provision is recognized when : (a) an enterprise has a present obligation as a result of a past event (b) it is probable that an outflow of resources will be required to settle the obligation and (c) a reliable estimate can be made of the amount of the obligation. If these conditions are not met, no provision can be recognized. This principl....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....(b) where by the payment which was made is not allowed to be deducted. Therefore, she contended that the view taken by the Tribunal and CIT (Appeal) is required to be reversed. 6. Counsel for the respondent has taken us to the order passed by CIT (Appeal) who while considering the case in paragraph 4.3 held as under:- "Moreover, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. AIMIL Ltd, 321 ITR 508 has held that no disallowance can be made in respect of Employers P.F. Contribution and Employees P.F. Contribution in case such contributions are paid before due date of filing. It is not in dispute before us that the contributions have not been paid before due date of filing of the return. We therefore, hold that ....