The Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Haryana, Rohtak v. M/S Porrits & Spencer (Asia) Ltd., Faridabad

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA ATCHANDIGARH. I.T.R. No.170 of 1995Date of decision: 16.09.2008 The Commissioner of Income-tax, Haryana, Rohtak. Vs. M/s Porrits & Spencer (Asia) Ltd., Faridabad. -----Applicant -----Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOELHON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG Present:Mr. Yogesh Putney, Sr. Standing Counselfor the revenue.Mr. A.C. Jain, Advocate for assessee.for the revenue.Mr. A.C. Jain, Advocate for assessee. ----- ORDER: Following questions of law have been referred for opinion ofthis Court by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, (Delhi Bench ‘D’),arising out of I.T.A. No.5353 and 5326(Del) /1989 in respect ofassessment year 1982-83:- “1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of thecase, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right inlaw in upholding the order of the Ld. CIT(A) whoreduced the addition of Rs.59,892/- to Rs.2,850 madeon account of disallowance u/s 80 VV of the Act”?case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right inlaw in upholding the order of the Ld. CIT(A) whoreduced the addition of Rs.59,892/- to Rs.2,850 madeon account of disallowance u/s 80 VV of the Act”?2. “Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of thecase, the Tribunal was right in law in confirming theorder of the Ld. CIT(A) who reduced the addition ofcase, the Tribunal was right in law in confirming theorder of the Ld. CIT(A) who reduced the addition of Rs.17,447/- to Rs.432/- made on account ofdisallowance of telephone expenses and deleting thebalance addition of Rs.432/- @ 25% sustained by theCIT(A)”? 3. “Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of thecase, the Tribunal was right in law in confirming theorder of Ld. CIT(A) who directed the A.O. to excludethe HRA amounting to Rs.23,345/- paid in cash toemployees while working out the addition made undersection 40A(5) of the Act?”case, the Tribunal was right in law in confirming theorder of Ld. CIT(A) who directed the A.O. to excludethe HRA amounting to Rs.23,345/- paid in cash toemployees while working out the addition made undersection 40A(5) of the Act?” 4. “Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of thecase, the Tribunal was right in law in upholding theorder of the Ld. CIT(A) who deleted the addition ofRs.1,34,713/- made as disallowance on account ofcommission payable to the employees?”case, the Tribunal was right in law in upholding theorder of the Ld. CIT(A) who deleted the addition ofRs.1,34,713/- made as disallowance on account ofcommission payable to the employees?” The questions referred are covered by our order passedtoday in I.T.R. Nos.80 to 82 of 1982 (M/s Porrits & Spencer (Asia)Ltd., New Delhi v. The Commissioner of Income-tax, Haryana).This reference is accordingly, decided in same terms. ( ADARSH KUMAR GOEL )JUDGEJUDGE September 16, 2008 ashwani ( RAKESH KUMAR GARG )JUDGE