9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Disallowance of accrued liability of sales tax on skimmed milk powder 2. Exclusion of legal cost recovered from National Bank of Pakistan from total income 3. Disallowance of reimbursement of medical expenses received by Executive Director 4. Disallowance of weighted deduction under section 35B for expenses incurred in India 5. Taxation of interest on fixed deposits with Bank of India on receipt basis 6. Disallowance of legal and court expenses for litigation against National Bank of Pakistan 7. Disallowance of brokerage and commission for negotiating sale of cement factories in Pakistan 8. Modification of deduction under section 80J in case of retrospective operation 9. Disallowance of excess daily allowance paid to employee for business travel 10. Rejection of deduction for sur-tax liability Analysis: 1. The appeals involved cross-appeals for the assessment year 1979-80, concerning various issues raised by both the Revenue and the assessee. The Revenue challenged the allowance of accrued liability of sales tax, exclusion of legal cost, disallowance of medical expenses reimbursement, weighted deduction under section 35B, and taxation of interest on fixed deposits. On the other hand, the assessee contested the disallowance of legal and court expenses, brokerage and commission, modification of deduction under section 80J, excess daily allowance, and deduction for sur-tax liability. 2. The Tribunal referred to previous orders related to the same assessee for the assessment years 1978-79 and 1980-81. It noted that the facts and issues remained consistent across the years. The Tribunal upheld the decisions made in the previous orders for the mentioned years, rejecting all grounds raised by the Revenue and the assessee. 3. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, holding all grounds against the Revenue. As for the assessee's appeal, certain grounds were rejected as they were covered by previous Tribunal orders and Supreme Court decisions. The Tribunal upheld the disallowance of brokerage and commission paid for negotiating the sale of cement factories in Pakistan, considering it a capital expenditure related to the sale of a capital asset. 4. The Tribunal found that the commission paid was directly connected to the sale transaction and, therefore, fell within the provisions of computing capital gains. It rejected the assessee's argument that the expenditure was for protecting the asset, emphasizing that it was not a revenue expenditure related to the business operations. The Tribunal cited relevant legal precedents to support its decision. 5. The Tribunal also addressed the assessee's reliance on certain legal decisions but found them irrelevant to the specific case at hand. It concluded that the commission payment was not allowable as a revenue expenditure since it was not related to the business operations. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the assessee's appeal on all counts, upholding the disallowance of the commission payment.
|
