9911796707
TMI Blog1988 (9) TMI 31X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tions stand referred to us by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bombay Bench 'E', under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 : "(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the proportionate reduction in the capital on account of relief under sections 80-1 and 80M did not come within the scope of rule 4 of the Second Schedule to th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the said decision in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee. That brings us to a consideration of question No. (2). As far as this question is concerned, the relevant discussion is to be found in paragraphs 5, 6, and 7 of the appellate order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. We are concerned with two assessment years 1971-72 and 1972-73. For these years, the assessee-company had creat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - Total : Rs. 5,15,024 (1972 - 73 Assessment year)" ------------------ It was stated before the Tribunal, and which position was accepted by the Department, that the bonus paid by the assessee had been, for these two years, separately and independently debited to the profit and loss account and the bonus reserve had not been drawn upon for making such payment. Indeed, the Tribunal found, fr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the balance-sheet that the bonus reserve had no co-relation to the actual payment of bonus nor had it been utilised for payment of bonus, it was right in holding that the bonus reserve could not be excluded from the computation of capital and it was, therefore, correct in upholding the Appellate Assistant Commissioner's decision in favour of the assessee. The question does not admit of any el ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
