In Commissioner Of Income Tax B.c.-Ii v. M/S National Organic Chemicals Industries Ltd, the High Court (2015) decided the matter.
Issue: DATED : 12[th] JUNE 2015 By this reference under Section 256 (1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the 'Act'), the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (the'Tribunal') has referred the following question of law for ouropinion: “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of thecase, the Tribunal was right in...
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX REFERENCE NO. 301 OF 1997
Commissioner of Income Tax B.C.-II
Vs.
M/s National Organic Chemicals Industries Ltd.
..Applicant
..Respondent
....
Mr. Suresh Kumar, Advocate for Applicant.Mr. Mandar Vaidya, Advocate for Respondent.
....
P.C.:
CORAM : M.S. SANKLECHA &
N.M. JAMDAR, JJ.
DATED : 12[th] JUNE 2015
By this reference under Section 256 (1) of the Income Tax
Act, 1961 (the 'Act'), the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (the'Tribunal') has referred the following question of law for ouropinion:
“Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of thecase, the Tribunal was right in holding that the GroupInsurance Premium paid should be ignored forquantification of addition u/s. 40A(5)-40(c)?”
2.An identical question was refereed by the Tribunal to this
Court for the Assessment Year 1981-82 in respect of the same
1 / 2
assessee. Accordingly following the decision of this Court dated 21July 1997 in the Income Tax Reference No. 35/1995 the questionreferred for our opinion is answered in the affirmative i.e. in favourof the assessee and against the revenue. The references areaccordingly disposed of. No order as to costs.
[N.M. JAMDAR, J]
[M.S. SANKLECHA, J.]
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.