Commissioner of Income Tax, Bareilly Vs. M/s. Kisan Sehkari Chini Mills Ltd.
EmailAppeal: Civil Appeal No. 545 of 2002
(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 18985 of 2000)
(From the Judgment and Order dated 15.10.99 of the Allahabad High Court in I.T. Application No. 155 of 1997)
(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 18985 of 2000)
(From the Judgment and Order dated 15.10.99 of the Allahabad High Court in I.T. Application No. 155 of 1997)
Petitioner: Commissioner of Income Tax, Bareilly
Respondent: M/s. Kisan Sehkari Chini Mills Ltd.
Apeal: Civil Appeal No. 545 of 2002
(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 18985 of 2000)
(From the Judgment and Order dated 15.10.99 of the Allahabad High Court in I.T. Application No. 155 of 1997)
(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 18985 of 2000)
(From the Judgment and Order dated 15.10.99 of the Allahabad High Court in I.T. Application No. 155 of 1997)
Judges: SYED SHAH MOHAMMED QUADRI & S.N. VARIAVA, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Jan 18, 2002
Appearances:
Mr. Altaf Ahmad, Additional Solicitor General, Mr.Rajiv Tyagi, Mr. B.V. Balram Das, Advocates with him for the Appellant.
Mr. Rakesh Dwivedi, Senior Advocate, Mr.Vishwajit Singh and Mr. Ravi Kumar Verma, Advocates with him for the Respondent.
Head Note:
INCOME TAX
Income Tax Act, 1961
Sections 36, 37 and 256 – Reference – Statement of case by trib-unal to High Court – Question of law – Question regarding deduc-tion of business expenditure – Tribunal holding that incentive bonus paid by the assessee was allowable under section 37 if not admissible under section 36(1)(ii) – Whether a question of law arises from such decision of the tribunal. Held, a referable question of law arose out of the order of the tribunal. Tribunal therefore, directed to state the case and refer the question of law to the High Court (Para 5)
JUDGEMENT:
SYED SHAH MOHAMMED QUADRI, J.
1. Heard Mr. Altaf Ahmad, the learned additional solicitor gener-al appearing for the appellants and Mr. Rakesh Dwivedi, the learned additional solicitor general appearing for the respond-ent.
2. Leave is granted.
3. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in ITA No. 155/97 dated October 15, 1999 taking the view that the following question is not a statable question of law. The question reads as follows:
“Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was legally justified in holding that the incentive bonus paid by the assessee is allowable under section 37 if it is not admissible under specific section 36(1)(ii) of the I.T. Act, 1961?”
4. We have perused the order of this Court in civil appeal no. 3507 of 1998 dated July 24, 1998 as also the order of this Court in special leave petition (C) Nos. 15305-15307 of 1987 dated May 11, 1988. We are of the view that the question for consideration by this Court in special leave petition (C) Nos. 15305-15307 of 1987 dated May 11, 1988 was a different question. The aforemen-tioned question is directly covered by the order of this Court in civil appeal no. 3507 of 1998 dated July 24, 1998.
5. In our view the said question is a referable question of law and it arises from the order of the tribunal so it needs to be referred to the High Court. We, therefore, direct the tribunal to state the case and refer the above-mentioned question of law to the High Court. The appeal is accordingly allowed. No costs.
1. Heard Mr. Altaf Ahmad, the learned additional solicitor gener-al appearing for the appellants and Mr. Rakesh Dwivedi, the learned additional solicitor general appearing for the respond-ent.
2. Leave is granted.
3. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in ITA No. 155/97 dated October 15, 1999 taking the view that the following question is not a statable question of law. The question reads as follows:
“Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was legally justified in holding that the incentive bonus paid by the assessee is allowable under section 37 if it is not admissible under specific section 36(1)(ii) of the I.T. Act, 1961?”
4. We have perused the order of this Court in civil appeal no. 3507 of 1998 dated July 24, 1998 as also the order of this Court in special leave petition (C) Nos. 15305-15307 of 1987 dated May 11, 1988. We are of the view that the question for consideration by this Court in special leave petition (C) Nos. 15305-15307 of 1987 dated May 11, 1988 was a different question. The aforemen-tioned question is directly covered by the order of this Court in civil appeal no. 3507 of 1998 dated July 24, 1998.
5. In our view the said question is a referable question of law and it arises from the order of the tribunal so it needs to be referred to the High Court. We, therefore, direct the tribunal to state the case and refer the above-mentioned question of law to the High Court. The appeal is accordingly allowed. No costs.
