JOSEPH J CHAKOLA Vs. COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE references relate to the assessment years 1979-80 and 1980-81 in the context of wealth-tax proceedings. We are expected to answer the following two questions :

(2.) WHETHER, in view of the decisions of the Supreme Court in Vazir Sultan Tobacco Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1981] 132 ITR 559 and Shree Sajjan Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1985] 156 ITR 585, the Tribunal ought to have held that the decision of the Kerala High Court stood overruled and gratuity liability actuarially determined is a 'debt owed' and was an admissible deduction ?"

(3.) THIS court has held, in paragraph 8 thereof, that the amount concerned in regard to which deduction is claimed will have to be ascertained as to whether it represents a contingent liability or whether it represents an existing ascertained liability. We have taken the view that this is a matter which should be considered independent of the provisions of the concerned taxation statute, whether it is the Wealth-tax Act, Income-tax Act or any other allied enactments, even if that question arises under any of the said enactments.