Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 7 of 7 (0.17 seconds)Section 37 in The Payment Of Bonus Act, 1965 [Entire Act]
Section 36 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Shaw Wallace & Co. Ltd. on 24 July, 1980
In CIT v. Shaw Wallace & Co. Ltd. (1991) 190 ITR 455 (Cal) similar facts, as in the present case were involved. The Calcutta High Court held that the payment made above the amount due under the Act to keep industrial peace was allowable as a business expenditure. We are in respectful agreement with the aforesaid decision of Calcutta High Court.
The Income Tax Act, 1961
Section 260A in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Chloride Industries Ltd. on 28 December, 1999
5. Learned counsel for the department then submitted that the Tribunal was not justified in upholding the deletion of addition of Rs. 16,350 made under section 40A(9) of the Act by the assessing authority which was paid as subsidy to certain clubs, of which the staff and workers of the assessee were members. In our opinion section 40A(9) of the Act has no application to the facts and circumstances of the case as payment was not made for formation or setting up of any trust, nor as contribution to the same. The learned Tribunal has relied upon the decision in Dy. CIT v. Chloride Industries Ltd. (2000) 111 Taxman 81 (Cal) (Mag) and Amrit Banaspati Co. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2000) 111 Taxman 186 (Del) (Mag). We respectfully agree with the aforesaid decisions.
1