1986 (11) TMI 90

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o first schedule though inserted w.e.f. 1st day of April, 1981 is merely of classificatory nature. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, CIT(A) was not correct in law and on facts in directing the assessing officer to treat the Debenture Redemption Fund as reserve and not a provision, for the purposes of computation of capital employed. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, CIT(A) was not correct in law and no facts in holding that the proportionate reduction in the capital employed for surtax purposes as done by the Assessing Officer in para 3 of his order should be deleted." 2. Smt. Manjari Kakkar, ld. DR and Shri O.P. Vaish, Advocate, ld. authorised counsel of the assessee company have been heard.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....representation. If that was the intention of the law makers, it could have been so expressed in specific terms. The law could have been amended retrospectively if the Parliament so willed. Since that was not done and since the provisions of the Explanation were made operative only w.e.f. 1st day of April, 1981, we will not be able to accept the representation made on the side of the Department. The order of the Tribunal for the asst. yr. 1972-73 mentioned above still held the field in the asst. yr. 1974-75 and, therefore, we will respectfully follow it and reject the first ground in the departmental appeal. 4. The issue raised in ground No. 2 of the Revenue's appeal is also not Res integra. This point had also come up before the Tribunal....