TMI Blog2006 (4) TMI 102X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion of law has been referred to this court for its opinion: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that bonus, was a part of the normal business expenditure was covered by the net profit rate applied to the instant case?" Both the cases are in respect of the same assessee for successive assessment years 1985-86 and 1986-87. The resp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ermed as special nature, but ordinary incident of business. However, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), while adjusting the net profit rate did not agree with the aforesaid finding of the Assessing Officer for disallowing the claim of deduction for payment made to the labourers for bonus for the assessment years in question. We may notice here that for the assessment year 1986-87, Rs. 1,6 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ideration as claimed by the appellant. On further appeal, the Tribunal upheld the claim of the assessee that payment of bonus during the relevant assessment year in question was of special nature for those assessment years and consequently that amount is to be reduced from the profit by applying the net profit rate. In the aforesaid circumstances, we are of the opinion that the finding reached ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... were of special nature. Looking to the assessee's case, while applying the net profit rate, we are, therefore, of the opinion that the Tribunal was justified in allowing the deduction of amount of payment made to the workers as bonus during the relevant assessment year as a result of agreement arrived at between the labour union and the assessee for the first time. In these circumstances, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
