9911796707
TMI Blog1995 (1) TMI 40X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ereto ? " Assessment year 1975-76: " 1. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the provision for gratuity should be regarded as reserve included in the capital computed for the purpose of the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964 ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the deductions computed under section 80G of the Income-tax Act could be included as income not includible in the total income of the assessee for the purpose of rule 4 of the Second Schedule to the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act ? " The Tribunal has disclosed no information on the facts except that it has mentioned that the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has held that the proposed dividend, payable out of the reserve, need ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me Court in Vazir Sultan Tobacco Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1981] 132 ITR 559 on the question whether any amount set apart for gratuity can be regarded as a reserve and persuaded us to consider whether, in view of the said judgment of the Supreme Court, the Tribunal should give a fresh consideration to the question, whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the provision for gratuity should be regarded as reserve included in the capital computed for the purpose of the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964. As we have noticed, we do not have the support of sufficient facts for any detailed examination of the application of law in this behalf. It will be proper in such a situation to accept the Revenue's case that the Tribunal should consider ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , 1964, under rule 2(ii) of the Second Schedule thereto, has been fully answered and the view in Madras Motor and General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1979] 117 ITR 534 (Mad) [FB] has been held to be obiter and not correct, in Southern Roadways Ltd. v. CIT [1981] 130 ITR 545 (Mad) [FB]. It is obvious that the same is to be carried out and it has to be held that the Tribunal has erred in following the law as laid down in Madras Motor and General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1979] 117 ITR 534 (Mad) [FB]. The Tribunal is thus required to take notice of the above judgment of this court and the said question is answered accordingly. The matter is accordingly remitted to the Tribunal. There will be no order as to costs. - - TaxTMI - TMITax - Inco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
