Case ID |
2fc04972-a54a-4491-8020-722c7b9fd6cc |
Body |
View case body. Login to View |
Case Number |
Income-tax Application No. 240 of 1995 |
Decision Date |
Jan 30, 1997 |
Hearing Date |
|
Decision |
The Tribunal found that the assessee had not switched from the mercantile system of accounting to the cash system. The entire receipt of annual maintenance charges (AMC) was merely transferred to the profit and loss account but this action alone did not warrant a change in the accounting system. The deduction of Rs.72.05 lakhs claimed by the assessee for the un-expired period of AMC was allowed, as it was confirmed that no real profit had arisen from this amount. The application under section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act was rejected, affirming the Tribunal's findings as factual and not raising any questions of law. |
Summary |
This case revolves around the interpretation of accounting practices under the Income Tax Act, 1961. Specifically, it addresses the treatment of annual maintenance charges (AMC) recorded on an accrual basis versus a cash basis. The Allahabad High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision that the assessee did not change their accounting system despite transferring the entire AMC to the profit and loss account. The ruling emphasized that mere accounting entries do not determine the system used. This case is significant for tax practitioners and companies regarding the proper accounting methods and their implications on tax obligations. It highlights the importance of maintaining consistency in accounting practices and the legal interpretations that can arise from such decisions. The outcome reinforces the precedent that factual findings by the Tribunal are conclusive unless substantial legal questions are raised. The case is beneficial for understanding the nuances of the Income Tax Act and the judicial approach to accounting practices in tax matters. |
Court |
Allahabad High Court
|
Entities Involved |
COMMISSIONER OF Income Tax,
HINDUSTAN COMPUTERS LTD
|
Judges |
R. DAYAL,
R. K. GULATI
|
Lawyers |
Shekhar Srivastava,
Sudhir Chandra,
S. Chopra,
Tapas Mishra
|
Petitioners |
COMMISSIONER OF Income Tax
|
Respondents |
HINDUSTAN COMPUTERS LTD
|
Citations |
2000 SLD 522,
2000 PTD 1014,
(1998) 233 ITR 366
|
Other Citations |
Kamani Properties Ltd. v. CIT (1971) 82 ITR 547 (SC)
|
Laws Involved |
Income Tax Act, 1961
|
Sections |
256
|