9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (3) TMI 429X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Held that:- The decision in Commissioner of Income-tax Versus Motor Industries Co. Ltd. [2010 (8) TMI 333 - Karnataka High Court] followed - The developmental work is intimately connected with the business of manufacture and sale of goods by the assessee - consideration received for developmental work is not liable to be deducted in computing the profits of the business – Decided against Revenue. - ITA No.756/2007 - - - Dated:- 14-2-2014 - Mr. Dilip B Bhosale and Mr. B Manohar, JJ. For the Appellant : Sri K V Aravind, Adv. For the Respondent : Sri Miss Tanmayee Rajkumar, Adv., For M/s King Partridge JUDGEMENT JUDGEMENT Per: Dilip B Bhosale: This income tax appeal is directed against the order dated 04.05 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion 80HHC and 80HHE of the Act? 3. Learned counsel for the respondent-assessee, at the outset, invited our attention to the order passed by this Court dated 02.11.2007 in ITA No.3 of 2002. The question of law that was framed therein reads thus: 1) Whether the appellate authorities are correct in holding that the contribution made by the assessee/employer towards the Benevolent fund created in favour of the employee is entitled to deduction under Section 40A(9) of the Act despite there being no compulsion under any other law as contemplated under the section for making such a contribution? 4. The Division Bench, for the reasons recorded in paragraph-7 of the order dated 20.11.2007 answered the said question in favour of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ue and against the assessee. 8. Learned counsel for the respondent-assessee did not dispute the legal position as reflected in paragraph- 8 of the judgment dated 10.12.2009. In the circumstances, we answer the second question in favour of the revenue and against the assessee in terms of the judgment dated 10.12.2009 in ITA No.27/2005. 9. This Court is informed that even the third question raised in the present appeal can also be answered in favour of the assessee in terms of the judgment dated 04.08.2010 in ITA No.28/2005. The question framed in ITA No.28/2005, which is similar to the third question in the present appeal, reads thus: Whether the income received by the Assessee towards developmental work in the course of its ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
