Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 9 of 9 (0.29 seconds)Estate Duty act, 1953
Section 28 in The Gift-Tax Act, 1958 [Entire Act]
Section 37 in The Gift-Tax Act, 1958 [Entire Act]
Section 16 in The Gift-Tax Act, 1958 [Entire Act]
Section 52 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Vazir Sultan Tobacco Co. Ltd. Etc. Etc vs Commlssioner Of Income-Tax Andhra ... on 25 September, 1981
The Supreme Court, after referring to Vazir Sultan Tobacco Co., Ltd. v. CIT , pointed out that the gratuity is a "provision" made by the assessee. The Supreme Court held that the amount set apart by way of provision or by way of reserve or fund to meet the liability of gratuity as and when it becomes payable will not be a deductible allowance or expenditure.
Mental Box Co. Of India Ltd vs Their Workmen on 20 August, 1968
Thereafter, after referring to Metal Box Company of India Ltd. v. Their Workmen (1969) 73 ITR 53, it was pointed out that (p. 599 of 156 ITR) :
Shree Sajjan Mills Ltd vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, M.P. Bhopal ... on 8 October, 1985
13. We are in respectful agreement with the above decision which again is based on the decision of the Supreme Court in Shree Sajjan Mills' case (1985) 156 ITR 585 referred to earlier. Any practical buyer of a share would not ignore the company's liability on an actuarial basis. This principle is now fairly well established.
1