9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (8) TMI 31X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h invalid? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the liability towards gratuity amounting to Rs.2,02,181 is allowable as an expenditure? (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the development rebate is allowable in respect of loose tools where individual items of loose tools cost less than Rs.750 and was allowed as a revenue expenditure? (4) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the commission receipts of Rs.88,950 should be treated as profits and gains attributable to priority industry carried on by the company, for the purpose of section 80-I of the Income-tax Act, 1961? (5) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the surtax liability unde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Tribunal also there was a ground taken regarding allowance of gratuity liability in terms of section 40A(7) of the Act. On that aspect the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) observed that there was no statutory liability in the assessment year in question to pay gratuity to the employees. The assessee' s stand was that on the basis of contractual liability the amount was payable. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) required the assessee to substantiate the stand by production of (a) gratuity scheme, (b) terms and conditions under which the employees were engaged by the assessee, (c) particulars of the scale of gratuity on the basis of which the contractual liability, if any, was undertaken and the scale on the basis of which a pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... raised before the Tribunal related to the computation for the purpose of deduction under section 80-I of the Act. The assessee's stand was that commission receipts of Rs. 88,950 were to be treated as profits and gains attributable to priority industry. Here again the Tribunal held that the commission was not to be treated as profits and gains attributable to priority industry, and therefore, was not to be taken into account for the purpose of working out benefit under section 80-I of the Act. On being moved for reference, the questions as set out above have been referred for the opinion of this court. We have heard learned counsel for the Revenue. There is no appearance on behalf of the assessee in spite of notice. According to learne ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
