Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (2.42 seconds)
Documents citing Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Commonwealth Trust (P) Ltd. on 1 April, 2004

Rbf Rig Corpn. Lic (Rbfrc) As Agent Of ... vs Asstt. Commissioner Of Income-Tax And ... on 30 November, 2007

52. The cash payment to the employee by the employer might be assessable as "salary" but it is not a "perquisite or amenity or benefit". We have already noted view of Full Bench of Kerala High Court in Commonwealth Trust Ltd. (supra) where their Lordship saw no good reason to give restricted meaning to the term "benefit, amenity or perquisite" as the same would not serve the purpose of the section. Their Lordship saw no rationality in the view of the majority High Courts, if it is held that cash allowance paid by the employer to an employee would be entitled to deduction, despite Section 40(a)(v) and restrict the application of above provision to non-cash advantage. Such construction, according to their Lordship, would be quite irrational, defeating the very purpose of the Legislation. The aforesaid view, as noted above, has not been approved by the Apex Court and a distinction has been drawn between cash payment on one hand and "benefit, amenity or a perquisite" on the other.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 91 - Cited by 5 - Full Document

R.R.Industries Limited, Chennai vs Department Of Income Tax on 9 February, 2012

In the case of Commonwealth Trust Ltd. (supra), the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in respect of expenditure incurred for valuation of business assets held that "........ We agree with the Tribunal that the claim falls under s. 37(1) 20 I.T.A. No.12 No.1256 1256/ 56/M/11 M/11 of the Act, and that the amount can well be regarded as having been laid out or expended wholly and exclusively for the purposes of the business. We think that the Tribunal was right in regarding the amount as having been expended on considerations of commercial expediency and sound business principles. It was in accordance with sound commercial practice to see that the buildings and machinery of the assessee were kept and maintained in a good state of efficiency for their work and functioning and valuation of these, done by the assessee, in the circumstances, must be regarded as expenses incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the business. We uphold the Tribunal's order allowing this head of claim for deduction."
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chennai Cites 25 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1