9911796707
TMI Blog1985 (8) TMI 40X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s decision under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, involve substantially only one point, namely, whether the Tribunal was justified in allowing the deduction of Rs. 32,480 imposed as penalty under section 8(2) of the M. P. General Sales Tax Act as a business expenditure under section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? The contention of the assessee which was accepted by the Tribunal w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt in excess of this difference. It was held that where the amount depicted only the difference between the tax at full rate and the tax at concessional rate, it should be allowed as a deduction under section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. On the other hand, if the amount of penalty is an amount in excess of this difference, also called the balance amount of sales tax (sic), then in the true s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the factual position in the present case has not been stated. Since the reference is required to be decided by us on the basis of the facts stated in the statement of case, it is not possible to answer the question referred on the basis of the incomplete statement of case which does not set out this significant fact. It is, therefore, necessary to require the Tribunal to submit a further and supp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
