Metro Goldwyn Mayer Ltd. (1939) 7 ITR 176 (Bom)
(ii) Anglo French Textile Co. Ltd. v. CIT (1953) 23 ITR 101 (SC)
(iii) Kalwa Devadattam ... Revenue :
( a) CIT v. Metro Goldwyn Mayer (India) Ltd. (supra)
( b) Anglo-French Textile Co. Ltd. v. CIT (supra)
( c) Carborandum Co. v. CIT (supra
Appeal No. 651 (Bom.) of 1979, dated 25-1-1980], Anglo French Textiles Ltd. v. ITO [1984] 8 ITD 161 (Mad.) and Bharath Printers ... However, the Madras Bench 'D' in the case of Anglo French Textiles Ltd. (supra) has discussed the question at length. It has been
Madras High Court
in CIT vs. Anglo French textiles (1993) 199 ITR7 85 (Mad) Hon'ble
Delhi High Court was not concerned with
apportionment is judicially recognized. Some such decisions are as follows:-
Anglo French Textile Co. 25 ITR 27 (SC)
Ahmedabad Umedbhal & Co. 181TR
Madras High Court in CIT vs. Anglo
French textiles (1993) 199 ITR7 85 (Mad) Hon'ble Delhi
High Court was not concerned with
with specific reference to page 531, Anglo-French Textile Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1953] 23 ITR 101 (SC), CIT v. Hindustan Shipyard
case of R D Aggarwal & Co. (56 ITR 20)
and Anglo-French Textile Co Ltd (23 ITR 101).
7. Upon the assessee
Apex Court referred to its own decisions in the case of Anglo-
French Textile Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1954] 25 ITR 27 (SC), and also
showing their practice of payment of
commission to its agents in the textile machinery division worldwide
confirming that the commission received by the assessee ... that the judgment of
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Anglo French Textile Company (1953)
23 ITR 101 (SC) relied
Best and Company v. CIT
(60ITR11), Anglo-French Textile Company Limited v. CIT [231ITR101 ].
Stating the above, the appellant submitted before the AO that
