9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (8) TMI 90X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t page 2 of the paper book for the opinion of this court: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax under section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is legal and valid and whether the Tribunal is justified in holding that the additional sum of Rs.1,45,595 was not in the nature of bonus and in setting aside the order passed by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Tribunal, the Tribunal has followed the decision of this court in the case of General Beopar Co. (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [1987] 167 ITR 86, and held that the Commissioner of Income-tax has no jurisdiction to exercise his revisionary power under section 263 of the Act. None appeared for the assessee. Heard learned counsel for the Revenue. Learned counsel for the Revenue fairly admits that the contr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tribunal [1979] 54 FJR 391 (SC) observed as under: "We may straightaway dispose of the argument based on section 3 1A. That relates to bonus linked with production or productivity in lieu of bonus based on profits. We are not concerned with such a situation and we agree that in regard to productivity bonus, section 31-A shall have operation but it speaks nothing about the other kinds of bonus an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nated by the 1976 amendment Act. Moreover, both parties have agreed that throughout they have been dealing with customary bonus only and whenever there has been a settlement or agreement it has been not the source of the right but the quantification thereof. The claim was rooted in custom but quantified by contract. It did not originate in any agreement, but was organised by it. We are, therefore, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... act that the payment has satisfied the three conditions laid down in the second proviso to section 36(1)(ii) of the Act of 1961, as referred to at page 461 in the case of CIT v. Shaw Wallace and Co. [1991] 190 ITR 455 (Cal), the claim of the assessee has rightly been allowed. In view of these admitted facts, we find no infirmity in the order of the Tribunal. In the result, we answer the questi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
