9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (8) TMI 612X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arding the applicability of Section 44C of the Act against the revenue and in favour of the assessee. Learned counsel appearing for the revenue does not challenge that in the absence of applicability of Section 44C of the Act, Section 37(1) would apply. Accordingly, we answer question No.2 as well against the revenue and in favour of the assessee regarding the applicability of Section 44C of the Act as well as allow the HO expenditure u/s 37(1) of the Act. The Appeals are dismissed accordingly. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nk. On 23-07-1984, the assessee filed its return of income for ₹ 1.61 crores. This return was revised on 27th October, 1986 and the income was reduced to ₹ 1.47 crores. The reason for revising the return was the claim of the assessee for deduction of the full amount of head office expenses debited to the profit and loss account to the extent of ₹ 21.07 lacs on the ground that Section 44C of the Act was not applicable as one of the three parameters mentioned in clauses (a), (b) and © of Section 44C was not attracted. According to the assessee, when one of the three parameters failed, the entire section 44C could not be applied. That, when one of the three parameters failed, the entire computation of deduction would col ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... R 301, held that Section 44C was not applicable. Admittedly, revenue has not filed any appeal against the decision of the Calcutta High Court in the case of Rupenjuli Tea Co. Ltd.(supra). Learned counsel appearing for the revenue contended that Revenue has not filed any appeal against the aforesaid judgment in Rupenjuli Tea Co. Ltd.(supra) because the revenue involved was meagre. That this fact has been mentioned in one of the Civil Appeals i.e. Civil Appeal No. 5822 of 2007, which is being dealt with by us today separately, that the department has accepted the decision in Rupenjuli Tea Co. Ltd.(supra) because the revenue involved was meagre i.e. a sum of ₹ 12,000/-. In support of his contention, he has placed a recent three Judge Ben ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fact, as rightly contended by the learned counsel for the revenue, there may be certain cases where because of the small amount of revenue involved, no appeal is filed. Policy decisions have been taken not to prefer appeal where the revenue involved is below a certain amount. Similarly, where the effect of decision is revenue neutral there may not be any need for preferring the appeal. All these certainly provide the foundation for making a departure. 13. In answering the reference, we hold that merely because in some cases the revenue has not preferred appeal that does not operate as a bar for the revenue to prefer an appeal in another case where there is just cause for doing so or it is in public interest to do so or for a pronouncemen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
