Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 4 of 4 (0.38 seconds)Section 37 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 260A in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Udaipur Distillery Co. Ltd. on 9 May, 2003
2. So, far as question No. 1 is concerned, a like question has been the subject-matter of DB IT Appeal No. 7/2002; CIT v. Udaipur Distillery Co. Ltd; in the case of respondent-assessee himself relates to asst. yr. 1985-86. The appeal was filed by the CIT. The Tribunal has found that the amount of shared expenses paid to McDowell are not hit by the provisions of Section 37(3A) and 37(3B). The facts about the incurrence of such expenses are the same as in the present case. In the said appeal the Court found that the shared expenses in question did not fall within the ambit of Section 37(3A) r/w (3B). The Court said :
1