Mr. Bharat Prasad Barnwal v. Commissioner Of Income Tax & Anr
High Court
02 Sep 2008 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · patnahcucisdb94
Parties
Mr. Bharat Prasad Barnwal v. Commissioner Of Income Tax & Anr
Date of order
02 Sep 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Mr. Bharat Prasad Barnwal v. Commissioner Of Income Tax & Anr, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Decision: Appeal stands dismissed accordingly but without any order as to costs.
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 JUDICATURE AT PATNA MA No.677 of 1999
MR. BHARAT PRASAD BARNWAL
Versus
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANR
For the Appellant:- Mr. Ajay Rastogi
For the Respondents:- Mr. Harswardhan Prasad, Sr. Standing Counsel and
Mrs. Archana Sinha, Jr. Standing Counsel
-----------
03 02.09.2008 This appeal has been admitted for hearing by order dated
16.1.2001 on the following substantial question of law:-
“Whether an assessee/ appellant who is Development Officer in the Life Insurance Corporation of India, is entitled for deduction of expenditure at the rate of 40% out of incentive bonus?”
Mr. Ajay Rastogi, appearing on behalf of the appellant very
fairly states that the question involved in this appeal has been
answered by order dated 16.2.2008 passed in Tax Case No. 13 of 1999 against the assessee.
Mr. Harswardhan Prasad, appears on behalf of the
respondents, Commissioner of Income Tax.
For the reasons stated in the aforesaid case, we have no option but to dismiss the appeal.
Appeal stands dismissed accordingly but without any order
as to costs.
(Chandramauli Kr. Prasad, J.)
P.K.
(Dr. Ravi Ranjan, 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.