The Cit v. Singapore Airlines Ltd
High Court
22 Aug 2008 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Cit v. Singapore Airlines Ltd
Date of order
22 Aug 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Cit v. Singapore Airlines Ltd, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, and in view of the aforesaid judgment of this Court, the present Appeal also stands dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.637 OF 2002
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.637 OF 2002
The CIT .. Appellant
Vs.
Singapore Airlines Ltd. .. Respondent
Mr.R.A.Vaishampayan for the Appellant.
Mr.F.V.Irani with Mr.A.K.Jasani for the Respondent.
CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & S.J.KATHAWALLA, JJ.
CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN &
S.J.KATHAWALLA, JJ.
DATE : 22nd August, 2008
DATE : 22nd August, 2008
P.C.
P.C.
P.C.
1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. This
Appeal has already been admitted by this Court on 3rd
September, 2004. Perused the Tribunal’s order, wherein,
the Tribunal has categorically observed that the
estimate of income liable to deduction of tax at source
made by the Assessee was honest, fair and reasonable.
Over and above, the Tribunal has followed its own
decision in the Indian Airlines Ltd V/s.ACIT - (1996) 59
Indian Airlines Ltd V/s.ACIT - (1996) 59ITD 353, wherein the Tribunal had taken a view that the
ITD 353
belief of the Assessee that the allowances were only the
reimbursement of expenditure incurred by the employees,
and as such, could not form part of their income in view
of the Board’s circular. The allowances were by way of
transport allowance, meal allowance and laundry
allowance.
2. Over and above Mr.Irani, the learned Counsel for the
Respondent also brought to our notice the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of CIT V/s.NicholasPiramal India Limited dated 15.1.2008 passed in the ITXA
Piramal India Limited dated 15.1.2008 passed in the ITXA
432 of 2001, wherein, the very same issue was involved
432 of 2001
432 of 2001
and this Court has taken a view that when the Assessee acts on the bonafide belief and makes the estimate then it is the case for no interference and accordingly the said Appeal filed by the CIT came to be dismissed.
3. Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, and in view of the aforesaid judgment of this Court, the present Appeal also stands dismissed.
(S.J.KATHAWALLA, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.)
(S.J.KATHAWALLA, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,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.