Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

4. Shri L.K.S.Dehiya, CIT(DR) represented on behalf of the Revenue and Shri S.Jhajharia, FCA represented on behalf of the assessee.

5. In the Revenue's appeal the revenue has raised the following grounds :-

"1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that contributions made by the assessee to Bata Workers Sickness Benefit Society is an allowable expenditure even though the Society in neither a body referred to u/s 36(1)(iv) or (v) and therefore, not allowable u/s 40A(9) nor does the society satisfy conditions of sub-section 10 of section 40A.

2. For that your petitioner craves the right to put additional grounds and./or to alter/amend/modify the present grounds at the time of hearing."

6. In regard to ground no.1 of the revenue's appeal against the action of the ld. CIT(A) in holding that the contribution made by the assessee to Bata Workers Sickness Benefit Society is an allowable expenditure, it was fairly agreed by both the sides that the issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in assessee's own cas for A.Yrs. 1990-91 and 1991-92 in ITA No.329/Cal/1996 and ITA No.99/Cal/1997 dated 24th September, 2002 wherein in para 17 of the order the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal has held as follows :-

19. In the result the Cross Objection filed by the assessee stands allowed.

20. In ITA No.1827/Kol/2012 the revenue has raised the following grounds :-

"1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that contributions made by the assessee to Bata Workers Sickness Benefit Society is an allowable expenditure even though the Society in neither a body referred to u/s 36(1)(iv) or (v) and therefore, not allowable u/s 40A(9) nor does the society satisfy conditions of sub-section 10 of section 40A.