Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 3 of 3 (0.16 seconds)Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Bombay ... vs Otis Elevator Co. (India) Ltd. on 26 March, 1976
8. We need not discuss the arguments advanced before us because the matter really stands concluded by the decision of this Court in CIT v. Otis Elevatar Co. (India) Ltd. in which it has been held that the excess development rebate reserve can be treated as "other reserves" as contemplated by cl. (iii) of r. 1 of the Second Schedule to the Surtax Act, 1964. In that case, the balance sheet disclosed a development rebate reserve of Rs. 1,66,077.25 while the statutory reserves required u/s 34(3)(a) of the IT Act, 1961, amounted to Rs. 1,65,944/- . The ITO had held that the excess of the reserve over Rs. 1,65,944/- could not be considered by him as reserves u/s 34(3)(a). The Tribunal had held that the excess reserve, though forming part of the development rebate in the balance sheet, could not be said to have been allowed as a development rebate and, therefore, the entire excess reserve without being reduced by any amount would form part of the reserves and thus entitled to be aggregated with capital for surtax purposes. This court while dealing with an identical question as in the present case referred to a circular issued by the CBDT bearing No. 53(F. No. 7/2/68-TPL) dated 11th January 1971 and held that the assessee would be entitled to have the said excess included in the capital computation for the purpose of surtax. Accordingly, the question as reframed is answered in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee. The assessee to get the costs of this reference.
Section 256 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
1