TMI Blog2001 (8) TMI 22X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... instance of the Revenue and five questions are referred at the instance of the assessee. All the questions pertain to the assessment years 1980-81 and 1981-82. We take up the questions ad seriatim: The following question is referred at the instance of the Revenue: "(1) Whether, the payments on account of medial insurance and accident insurance premium were liable to be included while calculat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee and against the Revenue. The next five questions are referred at the instance of the assessee: "(1) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the disallowance is required to be made under section 40(c) out of the remuneration paid to the managing director notwithstanding the fact that the remuneration was reasonab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 96] 219 ITR 228. We accordingly answer this question in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. At the instance of the assessee the following question No. 3 has been referred to us: "(3) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in confirming the disallowance of Rs. 30,577 invoking the provisions of section 37(5) of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntee commission was an expenditure of capital nature?" In view of the decision of the apex court in CIT v. Sivakami Mills Ltd. [1997] 227 ITR 465, taking the view that guarantee commission given to the bank is revenue expenditure irrespective of the nature of expenditure, we answer this question in the negative, i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. The fifth question referr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the disputed amount consists of fees paid to various advocates amounting to Rs. 30,577 in connection with the amalgamation proceedings as well as another amount of Rs. 6,835 being the expenditure incurred towards chairman and staff appointed under the direction of this court for convening the statutory meeting under the Companies Act. In view of the decision of the apex court in CIT v. Bombay ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
