Bombay H.C : The short point which arises for consideration in this reference is whether contribution to superannuation fund of employees stood covered by the notification issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT)

High Court Of Bombay

CIT vs. Mahindra Sintered Products Ltd.

Section 36(1)(iv)

S.H. Kapadia & A.P. Shah, JJ.

IT Ref. No. 341 of 1988

21st February, 2000

Counsel Appeared

R.V. Desai with J.P. Deodhar, for the Revenue : Arun P. Sathe, for the Assessee

JUDGMENT

BY THE COURT :

The short point which arises for consideration in this reference is whether contribution to superannuation fund of employees stood covered by the notification issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT), dt. 21st Oct., 1965, and, if so, whether only 80 per cent, of the amount actually paid would be allowed as deduction and whether that deduction should be spread over for five years. In the case of CIT vs. Sirpur Paper Mills (1999) 153 CTR (SC) 89 : (1999) 237 ITR 41 (SC), it has been held by the Supreme Court that the notification issued by the CBDT cannot curtail the scope of deduction granted by the IT Act, 1961.

In view of the said judgment of the Supreme Court, the reference is answered in favour of the assessee and against the Department.

Reference disposed of accordingly.

[Citation : 252 ITR 576]

Malcare WordPress Security