9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (3) TMI 51X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was allowed with reasons to be recorded separately subsequently. We, accordingly, now, hereby give reasons for allowing the appeal. The following question of law arises for determination under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in excluding 50 per cent. of the expenditure incurred by the assessee on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Officer who came to the conclusion that free distribution of samples was in the nature of advertisement and sales promotion and, therefore, section 37(3A) was applicable. Being aggrieved by the disallowance, the assessee preferred an appeal to the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). The appellate authority dismissed the appeal. Therefore, the matter was carried by the assessee to the Tribunal wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... promotion and, therefore, the case fell within the scope of section 37(3A) of the Income-tax Act. The Supreme Court overruled the judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court reported in CIT v. J and J Dechane Laboratories (P.) Ltd. [1996] 222 ITR 11. However, learned counsel for the assessee submitted that, in the present matter, the case should be remitted back to the Tribunal inasmuch as no oppor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee as to whether the expenditure incurred was on distribution of old drugs or whether it was given on distribution of new drugs. Hence, the judgment of the Supreme Court in Eskayef v. CIT [2000] 245 ITR 116 squarely applies. Accordingly, the above question is answered in the negative, i.e., in favour of the Department and against the assessee. Appeal is accordingly allowed with no order as to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
