Bonus liability discharged under law; High Court refused Supreme Court certificate and upheld factual inquiry into unclaimed amounts.

The Calcutta HC refused to certify the case for appeal to the Supreme Court, holding that the Revenue's proposed questions did not warrant further appeal. It noted that the assessee's bonus liability had been provided for and, in law, stood discharged under the Payment of Bonus Act; if employees did not claim the bonus for a substantial period, the employer's liability could not be treated as continuing indefinitely. The Tribunal was also directed to examine the factual basis of the unclaimed bonus and was permitted to take additional evidence while disposing of the matter under section 260 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

---

---

Issues: Whether the case was fit for grant of a certificate for appeal to the Supreme Court on the questions proposed by the Revenue.

Analysis: The Court held that the Revenue's contentions could not be accepted. The assessee's liability to pay bonus had been provided for and, in law, stood discharged under the Payment of Bonus Act. If the employees did not claim the bonus for a substantial period, the employer's liability could not be treated as continuing indefinitely. The Tribunal had also been directed to examine the factual basis concerning the unclaimed bonus and was given liberty to take additional evidence while disposing of the matter under section 260 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Conclusion: The case was held not to be a fit one for appeal to the Supreme Court and the request for certificate was refused.

---