M/S S.R.BATLIBOI & ASSOCIATES LLP,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-22, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 144/KOL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 November 2019AY 2014-153 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal followed a coordinate bench's decision and set aside the lower authorities' orders. The matter was restored to the Assessing Officer to decide in accordance with the final decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the M/s. Exide Industries Ltd. case.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeals concerned the allowability of provision for leave encashment for assessment years 2014-15 and 2015-16. The Assessing Officer had disallowed this claim, citing a stay granted by the Supreme Court in a related matter.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the allowability of provision for leave encashment in light of a Supreme Court stay on a High Court judgment. The Tribunal needed to determine how to adjudicate this claim pending the Apex Court's final decision.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 43B(f)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B”, BENCH KOLKATA

Before: SHRI S.S.GODARA, JM &DR. A.L.SAINI, AM

For Appellant: Shri Debabrata Ghosh, Advocate
For Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT
Hearing: 31/10/2019Pronounced: 13/11/2019

आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench:

1.

The captioned two appeals filed by the assessee , pertaining to assessment years 2014-15 & 2015-16 respectively, are directed against the common order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-6, Kolkata, which in turn arise out of separate assessment orders passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the ‘Act’).

2.

At the outset itself, the Ld. Counsel brought to our notice that the issue under consideration is covered by the judgment of the Co-ordinate Bench in the case of M/s S.R. Batliboi & Associates LLP & 145/Kol/2019 Assessment Years:2014-15 & 2015-16 S. R. Batliboi & Associate Co. in ITA No. 1598/Kol/2011 for AY 2007-08 in assessee’s own case, wherein the Tribunal vide para 4 has held as under:

“4. After hearing rival submissions and going through the facts and circumstances of the case and the order of the Tribunal cited supra, we find that the issue is dealt by the Coordinate bench of this Tribunal as under:

“3. At the outset, ld. senior counsel for the assessee submitted that in all these three appeals, the issue relates to allowability of provision for leave encashment in terms of sub-section (f) of section 43B of the Income Tax Act. The assessee had advanced its claim relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Kolkata High Court in the case of M/s. Exide Industries Ltd. reported in 292 ITR 470. However, the Assessing Officer did not accept the assessee’s claim observing that Department has preferred a Special Leave Petition before the Hon’ble Supreme Court and stay of the order of the Hon’ble Kolkata High Court was granted by the Hon’ble Apex Court. Ld. senior counsel submitted that under identical circumstances, Tribunal has restored the matter to the file of Assessing Officer to decide the issue in accordance with the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of DCIT, Circle-8, Kolkata –vs.- M/s. Ernst & Young Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 1787/Kol./2008. He, therefore, submitted that the matter may be restored back to the file of Assessing Officer.

4. Learned Departmental Representative did not raise any objection.

5.

We have considered the submissions of both the parties and have perused the records of the case. We find that Tribunal on identical issue in ITA No. 1787/Kol./2008 in the case of M/s. Ernst & Young Pvt. Ltd. has observed at para 12 in page 6 as under :- “12. Ground No. 5 of the revenue’s appeal is against the relief allowed by the CIT(A.) in respect of provision for leave encashment which was deleted by the CIT(A.) following the decision of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of M/s. Exide Industries Ltd. (supra). It was pointed out by the ld. DR that the Hon’ble Apex Court in”SLP (Civil) 22889 of 2008 has stayed the operation of the decision of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court. In view of the above, we set aside the orders of the authorities below on this point and restore the matter back to the file of the AO with the direction that he will readjudicate this issue as per decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of M/s. Exide Industries Ltd. (supra)”. Respectfully following the same we set aside the orders of authorities below on this point and restore the matter back to the file of Assessing Officer for adjudication as per the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of M/s. Exide Industries Ltd.(supra).

In view of the above and respectfully following the same, we set aside the orders of the authorities below and restore the matter back to the file of Assessing Officer for adjudication as per the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of M/s. Exide Industries Ltd. (Supra). This ground of appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.”

M/s S.R. Batliboi & Associates LLP & 145/Kol/2019 Assessment Years:2014-15 & 2015-16 3. We heard both the parties and carefully gone through the submission put forth on behalf of the assessee along with the documents furnished and the case laws relied upon, and perused the fact of the case including the findings of the ld CIT(A) and other materials available on record. We note that in view of the aforesaid decision of the coordinate bench on a similar issue, we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter back to the file of the AO for adjudication and AO to await the final outcome of the Hon’ble Apex Court in SLP (Civil) 22889 of 2008 in M/s. Exide Industries Ltd. case and decide this issue as per the decision of Hon’ble Apex court in M/s. Exide Industries Ltd., (supra). Thus, this ground of appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

4.

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the Court on 13.11.2019

More judgments on Section 43B(f)

All 219 judgments and leading authorities on Section 43B(f) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →