9911796707
TMI Blog1992 (8) TMI 71X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncome-tax Act, whereby the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following two questions to this court.: " 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was legally justified in holding that the petitioner-company was not entitled to claim deduction on account of surtax paid (in an application under) under section 154 of the Income-tax A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by following a decision of the Special Bench of the Bombay Tribunal in which it was held that surtax liability was not deductible in computing income from business. The appeals filed to the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) were also unsuccessful. Further appeals filed were also dismissed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. On an application under section 256(1) being filed, the Tribunal ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... decision of the Gauhati High Court which has struck a different note. In Doom Dooma Tea Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1989] 180 ITR 126, the Gauhati High Court has come to the conclusion that the amount of surtax paid is allowable as a deduction. It is on this decision that strong reliance is being placed by Mr. Chawla. The Supreme Court in the case of T. S. Balaram, ITO v. Volkart Brothers [1971] 82 ITR 50, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re, not maintainable. If the assessee had any grievance, the remedy would have been either to file an appeal against the assessment order or to file a revision to the Commissioner of Income-tax. Under no circumstances, could an application under section 154 be filed. For the aforesaid reasons, question No. 1 has to be answered in the affirmative and against the assessee. The result of this is tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
