https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24685 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. en-us Tue, 13 May 1986 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 21 Jan 2010 16:42:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24685 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. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 13 May 1986 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24685