1989 PLP 342 (PTD)
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BOMBAY Versus Messrs CANNING MITRA PHOENIX Pvt. Ltd.
| Citation | 1989 PLP 342 (PTD) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of India |
| Bench Members | R. S. Pathak and Sabya Sachi Mukharji, JJ |
| Parties | COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BOMBAY Versus Messrs CANNING MITRA PHOENIX Pvt. Ltd. |
| Primary Law | Income-tax |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 342 (PTD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Income-tax as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 PLP 342 (PTD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of India bench comprising: R. S. Pathak and Sabya Sachi Mukharji, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 342 (PTD) (COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BOMBAY Versus Messrs CANNING MITRA PHOENIX Pvt. Ltd.). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Headnotes / Summary
Order of High Court declining to call for reference from Income Tax Appellate Tribunal--Appeal--Order of Tribunal affirming order of A.A.C. which allowed claim of assessee to deduction in respect of its liability towards gratuity found to be proper--Appeal dismissed. A I R 1986 SC 484 fal.
Judgment & Decree
Civil Appeal No.173 of 1978, decided on 8th January, 1986.
Order of High Court declining to call for reference from Income Tax Appellate Tribunal--Appeal--Order of Tribunal affirming order of A.A.C. which allowed claim of assessee to deduction in respect of its liability towards gratuity found to be proper--Appeal dismissed. A I R 1986 SC 484 fal. This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment of the Bombay High Court declining to call for a reference from the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal.
2. In assessment proceedings for the assessment year 1972-73 the respondent claimed a deduction on account of provision made by it towards the gratuity payable to its employees, the amount so claimed being Rs.49,000 obtained on the basis of an actuarial valuation. The claim having been disallowed by the Income-tax Officer, the respondent appealed to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner allowed the appeal and directed the Income-fax Officer to admit the claim made by the assessee. The Income-tax Officer appealed to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal but without success. Thereafter the Commissioner of Income-tax applied to the Appellate Tribunal for a reference to the High Court, and the reference application having been dismissed by the Appellate Tribunal, the Commissioner then applied to the High Court for the same relief. The High Court also rejected the reference application.
3. After hearing learned counsel for the parties we are satisfied that the Appellate Tribunal was right in affirming the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner which allowed the claim of the assessee to deduction in respect of its liability towards gratuity. The position has been accurately set forth by this, Court in Shree Sajjan Mills Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax, M.P. (A I R 1986 S C 484) and learned counsel for the Commissioner has been unable to show us that the case is distinguishable. Accordingly we dismiss the appeal with costs. M.B.A./571 Appeal dismissed.