Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.21 seconds)
Gujarat Angadia Services,, Surat vs Department Of Income Tax on 20 January, 2010 cites

The Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Mumbai ... vs Sinnar Bidi Udyog Limited, Mumbai on 4 June, 2002

7. The Learned Departmental Representative relied upon the order of the Assessing Officer. However, no material is produced before us to rebut the finding of the Learned CIT(Appeals) through any material. The Learned CIT(Appeals) specifically noted that all the payments and the expenditure are subjected to vouchers and supported by evidences. Therefore, additions have been deleted. Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Sinnar Bidi Udyog Ltd. (2002) 257 ITR 216 (Bom.) held that ex-gratia paid to the employees of other concerns on consideration of business/commercial expediency and legitimate expectation of the employees is a "Revenue Expenditure".
Bombay High Court Cites 17 - Cited by 9 - H L Gokhale - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs U.P. Sales And Service Ltd. on 20 April, 2005

Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. U.P.Sales & Service Ltd. (2006) 281 ITA No.2918/Ahd/2008 ITO vs. M/s.Gujarat Angadia Services Asst.Year - 2005-06 -6- ITR 203 (All.) held that excess incentives/bonus paid to the employees are also allowable as deduction. In this view of the matter and considering the findings of the CIT(Appeals) that all expenditure are made for business purposes and supported by evidences and vouchers, we do not find any justification to interfere with the order of the Learned CIT(Appeals). We confirm his findings and dismiss these grounds of appeal of the Revenue. As a result, these grounds are dismissed.
Allahabad High Court Cites 9 - Cited by 1 - Full Document
1