TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court Decision: Income Tax Act Section 37(3A) Precedent Upheld, Managing Director's Wife Travel Expenses</h1> <h3>The Commissioner of Income Tax Versus Geoffery Manners & Co. Ltd.</h3> The Commissioner of Income Tax Versus Geoffery Manners & Co. Ltd. - TMI Issues involved:1. Expenditure on free distribution of samples2. Expenses incurred on the traveling of the Managing Director's wife outside India3. Amount credited to suspense account for arrears of wages and salaries4. Addition made under section 43B for non-payment of sales taxExpenditure on free distribution of samples:The court referred to a previous decision by the Apex Court in Eskayef, now known as Smith Kline Beecham Pharmaceuticals (India) Ltd., which held that expenses on distribution of free samples are considered as publicity and sales promotion expenditure liable to tax under Section 37(3A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The court, with the consent of both parties, decided in favor of the revenue on this issue.Expenses incurred on the traveling of the Managing Director's wife outside India:The court noted that the revenue did not challenge the deduction granted by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for the traveling expenses of the Managing Director's wife outside India, as it was a benefit given to the assessee in previous years. Therefore, the court upheld the decision of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal on this issue.Amount credited to suspense account for arrears of wages and salaries:The court mentioned a decision by the Supreme Court in CIT vs. Sugauli Sugar Works (P) Ltd., which favored the assessee regarding the crediting of wages to a suspense account. Therefore, the court decided in favor of the assessee on this issue.Addition made under section 43B for non-payment of sales tax:The court cited a decision by a Division Bench in Commissioner of Sales Tax vs. Empico Traders, which favored the assessee regarding the addition made under section 43B for non-payment of sales tax. Consequently, the court decided in favor of the assessee on this issue as well.In conclusion, the court entertained the application and ruled in favor of the revenue on the first issue regarding expenditure on free distribution of samples. However, the court did not entertain the application on the other three issues and disposed of them accordingly.
TaxTMI 