9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 369X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .SRI.P.BALAKRISHNAN, ADV.SRI.MOHAN PULIKKAL AND ADV.SRI.P.P.NARAYANAN JUDGMENT Antony Dominic, J. This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order passed in ITA 381/13 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench. On facts it is seen that during the assessment year 2006-2007, the assessee had contributed Rs. 1.5 crores to medical benefit scheme for the benefit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ection 37 of the Act, the learned counsel for the assessee relied not only on Section 37 of the Act but also on the judgment of the Madras High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax, Madras II v. T. Stanes & Company Ltd. [105 ITR 251]. 4. We have considered the submissions made. Section 37 provides that any expenditure (not being expenditure of the nature described in Section 30 to 36 and not being ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion'. (9) No deduction shall be allowed in respect of any sum paid by the assessee as an employer towards the setting up or formation of, or as contribution to, any fund, trust, company, association of persons, body of individuals, society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 (21 of 1860), or other institution for any purpose, except where such sum is so paid, for the purpose ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... add that since sub section 9 was added to Section 40A by Finance Act, 1984, the judgment of the Madras High Court in T.Stanes& Company Limited (supra) rendered in the context of assessment years 1959-1960 to 1964-1965 has no relevance in so far as the case of the assessee is concerned.
In such circumstances, answering the question of law in favour of the Revenue, this appeal is allowed. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
