COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. BOEHRINGER KNOLL LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) TWO questions stand referred to us :

(2.) AS far as question No. 1 is concerned, counsel are agreed that as far as this Court is concerned, the answer to be given is concluded by its decision in CIT vs. Alcock Ashdown & Co. Ltd. (1979) 8 CTR (Bom) 223 : (1979) 119 ITR 164 (Bom), and that the said question may, therefore be answered in favour of the assessee without further elaboration, factual or legal. Accordingly, we answer the said question in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee.

(3.) WHEN the matter was carried to the Tribunal, the Tribunal concurred with the AAC, observing that it was common ground that although the interest was shown on the liabilities side of the balance sheet, it had not fallen due on the first day. The Tribunal referred to sub r. (3) of r. 19A of the I.T. Rules, 1962, and held that the AAC was justified in directing the ITO to exclude the same from the deductible liability.