- (1.) THE Tribunal, Delhi, has referred the following question of law under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961, (hereinafter referred to as the Act), for opinion to this Court : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct to confirm the order of the learned CIT(A) deleting the addition of Rs. 82,879 out of Rs. 1,23,695 made under s. 43B of the Act -
(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows : The reference relates to the asst. yr. 1984 -85. The respondent -assessee has been assessed to income -tax in the status of a registered firm. For the assessment year in question, the ITO in the course of assessment proceeding came across the outstanding liability of Rs. 1,23,695 in the balance sheet which represented the unpaid amount on account of "purchase -tax". The aforesaid amount related to the with the Sales -tax Department within the statutory period which fell in the next accounting year. The ITO, however, added the aforesaid amount as income by invoking the provisions of s. 43B of the Act. Feeling aggrieved, the respondent preferred an appeal before the CIT(A) who allowed the deduction of Rs. 82,879 being of the view that the provisions of which fell in the subsequent assessment year and was within the statutory period which order has been upheld by the Tribunal.
(3.) WE have heard Shri A.N. Mahajan, the learned standing counsel for the Revenue, and Shri P.K. Jain has filed his appearance on behalf of the respondent. In view of the decision of the apex Court in the case of Allied Motors (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (1997) 139 CTR (SC) 364 : (1997) 224 ITR 677 (SC), the Tribunal was justified in upholding the deletion towards the amount of Rs. 82,879. We accordingly, answer the question referred to us in affirmative i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. There shall be no order as to costs.;