https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22159 Reference was declined on questions concerning contributions to Bharat Commerce Vidyalaya and disallowance of expenditure on gifts and presents because identical questions had already been refused reference earlier. The depreciation dispute was treated as a question of fact, since the finding that machinery came into contact with corrosive material supported allowance at 15%, and no question of law arose. On repairs of Bharat Commerce Vidyalaya and Shiva Temple, a similar question had earlier been accepted for reference, so the Tribunal was directed to state the case on that issue alone. Reference was thus confined to the fourth question. en-us Mon, 20 Aug 1990 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 07 Dec 2009 17:15:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22159 Reference was declined on questions concerning contributions to Bharat Commerce Vidyalaya and disallowance of expenditure on gifts and presents because identical questions had already been refused reference earlier. The depreciation dispute was treated as a question of fact, since the finding that machinery came into contact with corrosive material supported allowance at 15%, and no question of law arose. On repairs of Bharat Commerce Vidyalaya and Shiva Temple, a similar question had earlier been accepted for reference, so the Tribunal was directed to state the case on that issue alone. Reference was thus confined to the fourth question. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 20 Aug 1990 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22159