Case LawHigh Court › Itr/192/1983 Of Garden Silk Mills Pvt Lt...

Itr/192/1983 Of Garden Silk Mills Pvt Ltd v. Commissioner Of Income Tax

High Court 29 Aug 1996 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · gujarathc
Parties
Itr/192/1983 Of Garden Silk Mills Pvt Ltd v. Commissioner Of Income Tax
Date of order
29 Aug 1996
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Allowed

Case summary

In Itr/192/1983 Of Garden Silk Mills Pvt Ltd v. Commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (1996) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

The order — as passed by the High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD INCOME TAX REFERENCE NO.192 of 1983 For approval and Signature : Hon'ble Mr.Justice N.J.PANDYA : and Hon'ble Mr.Justice S.D.PANDIT : ================================================� The Garden Silk Mills Pvt.Ltd. �versus The Commissioner of Income Tax,Surat. ----------------------------------------------� �J.P.Shah,for the applicant �Mr.Mihir Thakore,Adv.with Mr.Manish R.Bhatt,Advocate for the respondent. ------------------------------------------------ �CORAM ; N.J.PANDYA & S.D.PANDIT,JJ. 29-8-1996 ORAL JUDGMENT Per S.D.Pandit,J. �The Income Tax Tribunal, Ahmedabad has referred the following questions to this court " whether the Tribunal was right in not allowing gratuity of Rs.3,67,199/- being expenditure incurred in respect of the relevant previous year for further payment on scientific method of calculation." The tribunal had not allowed the contention of the learned assessee for allowing the said expenditure and because of the same, the assessee has prayed before the tribunal to refer the said questions to this Court, but when this reference came up for hearing before us, the learned advocate for the assessee very fairly conceeded before us that in view of the decision of the Appex Court in 156 I.T.R.Page 585, the reference will have to be answered in favour of the revenue and in view of the said decision of the Appex Court,he would not press for the reference.We accordingly answer the reference in question in affirmative and disposed of the same with no order as to cost. ��* * * * *
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan