PTD 1998

1998 PLP 733 (PTD)

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Versus INDO ASIAN SWITCHGEARS (P.) LTD.

Jurisdiction / Court
221 I T R 65
Decided Date
Income-tax Case No. 140 of 1993, decided on 9th May, 1996
Honorable Judges
Ashok Bhan and N. K. Sodhi, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1998 PLP 733 (PTD)
Forum / Court 221 I T R 65
Bench Members Ashok Bhan and N. K. Sodhi, JJ
Parties COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Versus INDO ASIAN SWITCHGEARS (P.) LTD.
Primary Law Income-tax
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1998 PLP 733 (PTD)?

This judgment primarily cites: Income-tax as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1998 PLP 733 (PTD)?

The case was heard and decided by the 221 I T R 65 bench comprising: Ashok Bhan and N. K. Sodhi, JJ.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 1998 PLP 733 (PTD) (COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Versus INDO ASIAN SWITCHGEARS (P.) LTD.). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Income-tax

Representation

  • R.P. Sawhney, Senior Advocate with Sanjay Goyal for the Commissioner.

Headnotes / Summary

Reference

Tribunal having already referred a similar question of law for earlier year

Directed to make a reference for year in question

Business expenditure

Disallowance

Whether commission paid to agents to be considered for disallowance

To be referred

Indian Income Tax Act, 1961, Ss.37(3-A) & 256(2). Where the Tribunal declined to refer the question of law by mistake not taking note of its having granted a similar question of law relating to the assessee for an earlier year, the Court directed the Tribunal to refer the question of law for the year in question as to whether the Tribunal was right in holding that commission paid to agents was not to be taken into account for the purposes of disallowance under section 37(3-A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. R.P. Sawhney, Senior Advocate with Sanjay Goyal for the Commissioner.

Judgment & Decree

Reference

Tribunal having already referred a similar question of law for earlier year

Directed to make a reference for year in question

Business expenditure

Disallowance

Whether commission paid to agents to be considered for disallowance

To be referred

Indian Income Tax Act, 1961, Ss.37(3-A) & 256(2). Where the Tribunal declined to refer the question of law by mistake not taking note of its having granted a similar question of law relating to the assessee for an earlier year, the Court directed the Tribunal to refer the question of law for the year in question as to whether the Tribunal was right in holding that commission paid to agents was not to be taken into account for the purposes of disallowance under section 37(3-A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. R.P. Sawhney, Senior Advocate with Sanjay Goyal for the Commissioner. In spite of notice given to the respondent, no one has appeared. The Commissioner of Income-tax Jalandhar (hereinafter referred to as "the Revenue"), has filed this petition under section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for directing the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal"), to refer to this Court the following question of law along with the statement of case: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the expenses on account of commission paid to agents/marketing organisers amounting to Rs.5,31,954 and Rs.5,21,386 being turnover discount paid to the distributors are not to be taken into account for the purpose of disallowance under section 37(3-A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961?" The Revenue, in its application under section 256(1) of Income Tax Act, 1961, had stated in paragraph 4 thereof that for the assessment year 1980-81 relating to the assessee itself, the Tribunal had granted a similar question of law. It seems that by mistake the Tribunal did not take note of it and relying on a decision of the Delhi High Court in Om Parkash Fateh Chand Ltd, in Income-tax Case No.116(90), dated December 17, 1992, and an order of the Tribunal of Delhi Bench in CIT v. A.P.E. India (P.) Ltd. (1991) 37 ITD 351, declined to refer the question of law pertaining to this assessment year. Since the Tribunal has already referred a similar question of law in Income-tax Case No.48 of 1986 for the assessment year 1980-81, we direct the Tribunal to refer the following question of law alongwith the statement of case for the opinion of this Court: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in holding that the expenses on account of commission paid to the agents/marketing organisers amounting to Rs.5,13,578 and Rs.10,33,787 being the turnover discount paid to the distributors are not to be taken into account for the purpose of disallowance under section 37(3-A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961?" M.B.A./1219/FC Order accordingly.