TMI Blog1985 (6) TMI 2X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erred to us for our opinion : " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the payment of commission of Rs. 30,000 was disallowable under the provisions of section 40(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? " Since this question is covered by the decision of a Full Bench of this court in Chhotalal Co. v. CIT [1984] 150 ITR 276, this and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Guj). The decision of the Full Bench in Chhotalal Co.'s case is reported in [1984] 150 ITR 276. The question which has been raised is that the Supreme Court has rejected the special leave petition preferred by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Ahmedabad, against the decision of this court in Sajjanraj Divanchand's case [1980] 126 ITR 654 on merits and, therefore, it is tantamount to confirming the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Committee of the Privy Council in granting special leave to appeal.. Such special leave will, therefore, be granted only sparingly and in exceptional cases (See Bharat Bank Ltd. v. Employees of Bharat Bank Ltd. and Bharat Bank Employee's Union, AIR 1950 SC 188, and Madhav Hayawadanrao Hoskot v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1978 SC 1548). If, therefore, the Supreme Court refuses to grant leave to file ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , it would be unsafe to say that the effect of not granting the special leave even where the court in its order refusing to grant the leave stated that special leave petition was dismissed on merits since there is no practice to state the reasons while refusing the leave that it would tantamount to confirming the judgment sought to be appealed against on the matter of the principle involved and/or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
