9911796707
TMI Blog1984 (2) TMI 45X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... KANIA J.-This is an application by the Commissioner under s. 256(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961, for directing the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to refer to the court for determination the following question and to state case for that purpose : " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the additional bonus of Rs. 1,75,650 agreed on Janua ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the employees. The assessee claimed this amount as a deduction by way of a revised return. In the books of account of the assessee, the liability for the payment of this amount as well as the payment were entered after the accounting year. The ground on which the ITO disallowed this deduction was that this liability was neither crystallized in the accounting year nor entered in the books of accoun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a new question, namely, whether the Tribunal was in error in allowing this deduction without considering the limitation under the first proviso to s. 36(1)(ii) of the I.T. Act, 1961. This question was neither raised before the Tribunal nor at any earlier stage nor has it been dealt with by the Tribunal. A reading of the proviso to s. 36(1)(ii) of the I.T. Act makes it clear that in order to decid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
