Itta/320/2003 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.hyderabad Industries Ltd

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDYANDHON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM I.T.T.A No.320 OF 2003 17-12-2014 BETWEEN The Commissioner of Income Tax, Hyderabad - I …Appellant And M/s. Hyderabad Industries Ltd., Hyderabad …..Respondent HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDYANDHON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM I.T.T.A No. 320 OF 2003 JUDGMENT:(per the Hon'ble Sri Justice L. Narasimha Reddy) The only question that arises in this appeal is as to whetherthe assessing officer can disallow deduction of part of bonus paidby an assessee through an intimation under Section 143 (1) (a) ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, ‘the Act’). The respondent made provision for certain amount for bonusin its books of account. However, on the basis of the agreementwith the workers union and the ordinance issued by theappropriate Government, it paid higher amount. The assessing officer disallowed the amount over and above what was mentionedin the books of account. The respondent filed appeal before theHyderabad Bench ‘B’ of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and thesame was allowed. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learnedcounsel for the respondent. The issue is no longer res integra. On several occasions,the Courts have explained the purport of an intimation underSection 143 (1) (a) of the Act on the one hand and an order passedunder Section 143 (3) of the Act on the other hand. Recently, inI.T.T.A No.111 of 2003, this Court rendered judgment on 16-09-2014 explaining the difference between two procedures. It washeld that where debatable issues exist, the procedure underSection 143 (1) (a) of the Act cannot be invoked. Following the same, we dismiss the appeal. There shall beno order as to costs. ___________________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J 17-12-2014ks ____________________________ CHALLA KODANDA RAM, J