2024 (12) TMI 264

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....11 and 2011-12. The substantial question of law that arises for consideration is as follows: Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble Tribunal was right in rejecting the claim of the appellant claiming deduction for the provision made for leave salary under section 43B(f) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is correct in law? 2. The Kerala High Court in Dhanalakshmi Bank Ltd. V. Commissioner of Income-tax, Cochin (410 ITR 280) had considered an identical issue in regard to the applicability of Section 43B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'Act') in relation to deductions under sub-clause (f) that reads as follows: 43B.Certain deductions to be only on actual payment. Notwithstanding ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s allowable only on actual payment. It is submitted that the Calcutta High Court has struck down the said provision. Admittedly a Special Leave Petition was filed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and there is also a stay order granted. In such circumstances, the provision applies and this Court has also in a similar case answered the question in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee in South Indian Bank Ltd. v. CIT [2014] 49 taxmann.com 100/226 Taxman 130 (Mag.)/363 ITR 111 (Ker). The said question is also answered against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue, affirming the order of the Tribunal to that extent.' 4. In the present case, it is an admitted position, as seen from the order of the Tribunal dated 09.06.20....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n decided against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee in the judgment dated 06.07.2021 made in T.C.A.No.62 of 2015 [The Commissioner of Income Tax, Trichy Vs. M/s.KMC Speciality Hospitals India Ltd., (Formerly Sea Horse Hospitals P. Ltd.,) No.6, Royal Road, Trichy] wherein this Bench held as follows: ........... 3.The appeal was admitted on 2-12-2019 on the following substantial question of law : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee is entitled for carry forward of the depreciation loss pertaining to the assessment year 1997-98 to the present assessment year 2006-07, which is beyond the eight year period mandated under the provisions....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....and it is taken to the next succeeding year. Where there is current depreciation for such succeeding year the unabsorbed depreciation is added to the current depreciation for such succeeding year and is deemed as part thereof. If, however, there is no current depreciation for such succeeding year, the unabsorbed depreciation becomes the depreciation allowance for such succeeding year. We are of the considered opinion that any unabsorbed depreciation available to an assessee on 1st April, 2002 (asst. yr. 2002-03) will be dealt with in accordance with the provisions of section 32(2) as amended by Finance Act, 2001. And once the Circular No. 14 of 2001 clarified that the restriction of 8 years for carry forward and set-off of unabsorbed deprec....