2012 (10) TMI 132

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Respondents : M/s. Binod Poddar, Sr. Advocate, Mahendra Choudhary, Darshan Poddar, Piyush Poddar & Amrita Sinha, Advocates. Heard learned counsel for the parties. This appeal has been preferred against the order passed by the I.T.A.T. dated 12.05.2000. While admitting the appeal following question was framed by this Court:- "Despite the fact that the Assessing Officer and C.I.T(Appeals) ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sidered the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant and we are of the considered opinion that so far as the gift articles are concerned, the I.T.A.T held that though on gift articles there was no Company Logo printed but yet there was Company's official rubber stamp on gift articles, therefore, the gift articles were for the purpose of incentive for promotion of the business. In view o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....A.T sent the matter back to the Assessing Officer to implement Section 37(2A) after necessary computation. In view of the above reason, we are of the considered opinion that where the particular articles were the gift articles and were used as incentive for promotion of the business is concerned, that issue has been decided by the I.T.A.T after considering the fact of the case and substantially....