Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Commissioner of Income Tax Versus Dharamsi Moraji Chemicals Co. Ltd.

2015 (4) TMI 228 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

Ascertaining the perquisite value on account of motor car - Tribunal directing AO to compute disallowance as per Rule 3 - Held that:- Mrs.Vasanti Patel appearing on behalf of the assessee that there is judgment in the field, namely, of the Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. British Bank of Middle East (2001 (8) TMI 12 - SUPREME Court) directly on the point. Since that covers the issue or question against the assessee and in favour of the revenue, we hold accordingly. - Decided in favour of revenue. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

mbernath and Kumbari. The same has nexus with the industrial activity of the assessee. In the circumstances the Assessing Officer was directed to consider these items under the head "Other income" and not exclude them for the purpose of deduction under section 80-I of the Income Tax Act. Thus, we are concerned for the year 1987-1988 but the ground in the present memo of appeal is framed in such a manner that it is difficult to ascertain whether the revenue is really aggrieved by what is done by .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ture of advertisement and no disallowance under Rule 6B can be made as directed by Tribunal - Held that:- We are of the view that the tribunal has followed the judgment of this Court in the case of the Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Allana and Sons reported in (1993 (4) TMI 13 - BOMBAY High Court). If that is how the matter has been approached and equally the tribunal found that the facts and circumstances in case of Allana and Sons, are identical to the assessee before us then even this questio .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n made pertaining to the premium to group insurance policy, the tribunal held that the premium of group insurance should not be considered as salary or perquisites for disallowance under section 40A (5) of the Income Tax Act is the conclusion reached by the Commissioner (Appeals). However, this point or question has been repeatedly raised but stands covered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee.

Production incentives - Held that:- The tribunal held that once the revenue co .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the tribunal has referred, in the impugned order to its findings in its order and pertaining to the same assessee for the assessment year 1982-83. That would bind the revenue. There are series of orders but the tribunal for the sake of reference points out its order for the assessment year 1982-83. In the circumstances, we are of the view that there being no distinction on facts and the tribunal's consistent view being not questioned successfully because the departmental application for referen .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s fairly conceded by Ms.Patel that the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Britania Industries Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner of Income Tax (2005 (10) TMI 30 - SUPREME Court) answers it against the assessee and in favour of the revenue.

Investment allowance under section 32A in respect of the 10 items though the same were not used directly for manufacturing activities - Held that:- Once again it has been brought to our notice that in the assessee's own case pertaining to d .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nd that for some years the department endeavored to make an application and sought reference of the question of law to this Court for its opinion. However, for some years it did not make such attempt. In the circumstances, the tribunal was justified in concluding that the view taken by it earlier and pertaining to this assessee continues to bind the revenue. In any event, there is judgment of this Court in the field namely, Associated Bearing Co. Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner of Income Tax (2005 (10 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

question is concerned, we do not find how it is framed for it does not arise from any of the tribunal's findings or grounds However, we do not find any reference being made to higher rate of investment allowance of 35% on machinery installed for the purpose of manufacturing Sulphuric Acid. This question, therefore, could not have arisen and from paragraph 32 of the tribunal's order as well. We cannot conclude that such question can be termed as substantial question of law. From the order passed .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

pellate Tribunal, Mumbai Bench dated 6th October, 1999. The assessment year in this case is 1986-87 and 1987-88. 2. This Court while admitting the appeal did not formulate any substantial question of law. The law mandates such formulation and independent of what has been termed as a substantial question by the parties. This Court has passed the order recording that the questions at Page 4, 5 and 6 are treated as substantial questions of law. 3. Those questions are reproduced hereinbelow: "1 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

umstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in confirming the order of the CIT (A) that expenditure incurred by the assessee is not in the nature of advertisement and no disallowance under Rule 6B can be made ? 4. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in confirming the order of the CIT (A) that the premium of group Insurance policy should not be considered as salary or perquisite for disallowance under Section 40A (5) ? 5. Whether on the facts .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

order of the CIT (A) directing the Assessing Officer not to include depreciation on guest house while computing the disallowance under section 37 (4) ? 8. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in confirming the order of the CIT (A) directing the Assessing Officer to allow Investment allowance under section 32 A in respect of the 10 items though the same were not used directly for manufacturing activities ? 9. Whether on the facts and circumstances of t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

The Assessing Officer sought revised computation and after requisite notices were issued proceeded to scrutinise the return. He made several additions and disallowances. Being aggrieved, the assessee approached the Commissioner in Appeal and the Commissioner of the Income Tax passed a detailed order partly allowing the appeal. That order of the Commissioner delivered on 8th August, 1991 came to be challenged by the assessee as also the revenue before the tribunal. The tribunal's detailed ord .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

by the Registry. In these circumstances we have not allowed the parties to controvert the factual conclusions reached in the impugned orders. 5. The compilation tendered by Ms.Vasanti Patel appearing for the respondent is taken on record. 6. As far as the first question and which we have reproduced above, it is fairly conceded by Mrs.Vasanti Patel appearing on behalf of the assessee that there is judgment in the field, namely, of the Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. British Bank of Middle East (20 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ct, 1961. Mr.Pinto placed reliance upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Sterling Foods reported in (1999) 237 ITR 579 (SC). He would submit that the tribunal has failed to note that under section 80-I deduction is permissible only if the profits and gains are derived from the industrial undertaking. Therefore, it is required and in all such cases to establish as to how the same are derived from the industrial undertaking. In the present case, t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ument. The details of the amounts under the head "Details of Miscellaneous income" are shown in the Profit and Loss Account placed in the appeal paperbook of the tribunal at page 6. From these details, the tribunal found that the Assessing Officer has for the purpose of working out deduction under section 80-I in the next assessment year has granted the benefit. The assessee's advocate, therefore, may have argued on, what we find is ground No.5 of the assessee's appeal, for the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

h the amounts are termed "miscellaneous income", "other income" are derived from two industrial units situated at Ambernath and Kumbari. The same has nexus with the industrial activity of the assessee. In the circumstances the Assessing Officer was directed to consider these items under the head "Other income" and not exclude them for the purpose of deduction under section 80-I of the Income Tax Act. Thus, we are concerned for the year 1987-1988 but the ground in th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ragraph 11 of the tribunal's order do not raise any substantial question of law. 9. As far as the third question is concerned, we are of the view that the tribunal has followed the judgment of this Court in the case of the Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Allana and Sons reported in (1995) 216 ITR 690 (Bom.). If that is how the matter has been approached and equally the tribunal found that the facts and circumstances in case of Allana and Sons, are identical to the assessee before us then even .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t be considered as salary or perquisites for disallowance under section 40A (5) of the Income Tax Act is the conclusion reached by the Commissioner (Appeals). However, this point or question has been repeatedly raised but stands covered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee by the orders of the tribunal itself. The tribunal has referred to one such order in paragraph 23 of the paperbook. If the tribunal has found that the earlier decisions and orders rendered in the case of the very .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sessment year 1987-88 are different from earlier years, then, the tribunal's view for earlier assessment year on facts would bind the revenue. We do not know how such view can give rise to any substantial question of law. In any event, in two decisions to which our attention has been invited by the counsel for the assessee the view taken by the Delhi High Court in the case of the Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Kelvinator India Ltd. (1988) 171 ITR 256 and CIT vs. Central Province Manganese Or .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

retiring employee, the tribunal has upheld the Commissioner's view. In doing that the tribunal has referred, in the impugned order at page 65 and paragraph 25 to its findings in its order and pertaining to the same assessee for the assessment year 1982-83. That would bind the revenue. There are series of orders but the tribunal for the sake of reference points out its order for the assessment year 1982-83. In the circumstances, we are of the view that there being no distinction on facts and .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

7 reproduced above, it is fairly conceded by Ms.Patel that the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Britania Industries Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner of Income Tax (2005) 278 ITR 546 answers it against the assessee and in favour of the revenue. 14. As far as question No.8 is concerned, once again it has been brought to our notice that in the assessee's own case pertaining to disallowance, namely, Investment allowance under section 32A, the tribunal has passed the order in yea .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

uestion of law to this Court for its opinion. However, for some years it did not make such attempt. In the circumstances, the tribunal was justified in concluding that the view taken by it earlier and pertaining to this assessee continues to bind the revenue. In any event, there is judgment of this Court in the field and which has been brought to our notice, namely, Associated Bearing Co. Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner of Income Tax (2006) 286 ITR 341. That makes a reference to all prior decisions of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version