<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1984 (4) TMI 124 - ITAT MADRAS-A</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68982</link>
    <description>The Tribunal overturned the Commissioner&#039;s decision to revise the assessment for the company for the assessment year 1978-79. The Tribunal found that the bonus paid to employees was in compliance with the Payment of Bonus Act, and even if some employees were not entitled to it, the expenditure should be allowed. The Tribunal also supported the company&#039;s position on extra shift allowance based on Board circulars. Additionally, the Tribunal accepted evidence confirming the installation and use of electrical machinery, emphasizing that the Commissioner&#039;s decision was hastily made without proper consideration. Consequently, the Tribunal canceled the Commissioner&#039;s order, ruling in favor of the company.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 23 Apr 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Jan 2012 14:58:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=107354" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1984 (4) TMI 124 - ITAT MADRAS-A</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68982</link>
      <description>The Tribunal overturned the Commissioner&#039;s decision to revise the assessment for the company for the assessment year 1978-79. The Tribunal found that the bonus paid to employees was in compliance with the Payment of Bonus Act, and even if some employees were not entitled to it, the expenditure should be allowed. The Tribunal also supported the company&#039;s position on extra shift allowance based on Board circulars. Additionally, the Tribunal accepted evidence confirming the installation and use of electrical machinery, emphasizing that the Commissioner&#039;s decision was hastily made without proper consideration. Consequently, the Tribunal canceled the Commissioner&#039;s order, ruling in favor of the company.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Apr 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68982</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>