Court allows Income-tax Application on interest disallowance, rejects deductions for excise duty, charity relief, and sole selling agency commission.

The Income-tax Application was allowed only for the disallowance of interest on borrowed money used for interest-free advance, with the court directing the question to be stated for opinion. The deductions for excise duty on single filament yarn, excise duty liability on crimped stretch texturised yarn, relief on charity collections, sole selling agency commission, disallowance under section 80VV limits, and relief under section 80J for unit 'B' were all rejected for reference based on previous decisions. The court justified the expenditure on bringing the late chairman's body for burial.

---

---

Issues:
1. Disallowance of interest on borrowed money used for interest-free advance
2. Deduction of excise duty on single filament yarn
3. Deduction of excise duty liability on crimped stretch texturised yarn
4. Relief on charity collections not constituting trading receipts
5. Sole selling agency commission deduction
6. Disallowance under section 80VV limits
7. Expenditure on bringing the late chairman's body for burial
8. Relief under section 80J for unit 'B'

Analysis:
1. The Revenue sought a reference on the disallowance of interest on borrowed money utilized for interest-free advance. The court directed the question to be stated as it was identical to a previous case.
2. The deduction of disputed excise duty on single filament yarn was rejected for reference by the court, following a previous decision.
3. The deduction of excise duty liability on crimped stretch texturised yarn was also rejected for reference based on a previous court order.
4. Relief on charity collections not constituting trading receipts was allowed by the Tribunal, and the court directed the question to be stated for opinion.
5. The deduction of sole selling agency commission was allowed by the Tribunal, and the court rejected the question for reference.
6. The disallowance under section 80VV limits was rejected as the amount was not spent in connection with proceedings under the Act, and the question was accordingly rejected.
7. The expenditure on bringing the late chairman's body for burial was considered justified by the court, and the question was not directed to be stated.
8. The relief under section 80J for unit 'B' was rejected for reference by the court based on a previous decision.
Overall, the Income-tax Application was allowed only for question No. 1 and rejected for the other questions, with the Tribunal directed to state question No. 1 for the court's opinion under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act.

---