Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
S. Muralidhar, M.S.Raman, JJ.
Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 1, Bhubaneswar – Appellant
Versus
Orissa Hydro Power Corporation Ltd., Bhubaneswar – Respondent
ITA No. 09 of 2021
Decided On : 31-01-2023
Provision for Liability - Mercantile System of Accounting - The court held that the provision for liability under the head 'dam maintenance' is an admissible expenditure when the Assessee follows the mercantile system of accounting.
Fact of the Case:
The Revenue appealed against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) regarding the admissibility of the provision for liability under the head 'dam maintenance' as an expenditure.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found in favor of the Assessee, citing consistency in previous orders and correspondence with the Government regarding dam maintenance charges.
Issues: The main issue was whether the provision for liability under the head 'dam maintenance' is an admissible expenditure.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the Assessee's adoption of the mercantile system of accounting and the rule of consistency in previous orders to support the admissibility of the expenditure.
Final Decision: The appeal by the Revenue was dismissed, affirming the ITAT's decision in favor of the Assessee.
JUDGMENT
I. A. No.20 of 2021
1. For the reasons stated in the application, filing of certified copies of orders under Annexures-2 and 3 are dispensed with. The application is allowed.
ITA No. 9 of 2021
2. The Revenue has filed this appeal against an order dated 25th February, 2020 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack (ITAT) in ITA No.115/CTK/2014 as well as ITA No.122/CTK/2014-one appeal being filed by Revenue Department (ITA No.115/CTK/2014) and the other being filed by the Assessee (ITA No.122/CTK/2014).
3. The question sought to urge for consideration by this Court in the present appeal is whether the ITAT was right in holding that with the Assessee having followed the mercantile system of accounting, the provision for liability under the head 'dam maintenance' is an admissible expenditure?
4. The ITAT-Tribunal has answered the above issue in favour of the Assessee. In doing so, a reference was made to an earlier order dated 20th September, 2017of the Tribunal itself on the same issue in the case of OMC Ltd (ITA No.177/CTK/2013). Reference was also made to the correspondence with the Government which showed that the demands were being made in respect of the dam maintenance charges as 'early payment.'
5. Adopting the rule of consistency, the CIT (A) in its order dated 1st January, 2014 and the Tribunal in the impugned order have held in favour of the Assessee and against the Revenue.
6. In that view of the matter, the Court is not inclined to frame the question as urged by the Revenue in the present case. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.
Under the mercantile system of accounting, the provision for liability under specific heads may be considered as admissible expenditure.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of consistent observations and directions from a similar case to the present appeal, leading to the setting aside of the impugned o....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for a definite finding on whether a provision represents an ascertained liability under the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Taxpayer allowed to choose accounting method; discrepancies challenged must be backed by strong evidence.
Expenditures on dies/moulds, software, lease premiums revenue in nature sans enduring benefit; s.14A disallowance invalid without AO's recorded dissatisfaction on assessee's suo motu workings; bad de....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
