2003 (2) TMI 27

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....contribution by the assessee-company of Rs. 1,28,228 to superannuation fund was a allowable deduction for the assessment year 1978-79?" Assessment year 1979-80: Question No. 2: "Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessee was entitled to deduction of Rs. 22,81,847 which paid by the assessee company to its employees over and above the bonus payable under the Payment of Bonus Act for the assessment year 1979-80?" Assessment years 1978-79 and 1979-80: Question No. 3: "Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the limit prescribed under section 80G(4) was not confined to 55 per cent. (50 per cent.) of 10 per cent. of gross total income and the said section only prescribed the ceiling for deduction fo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eld that the assessee's case was not covered by the second proviso to section 36(1)(ii). Mr. Desai, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the Revenue, relied upon judgment of this court in the case of CIT v. Rajaram Bandekar and Sons (Shipping) Pvt. Ltd. [1999] 237 ITR 628, and submitted that ex gratia payment to the employees by way of bonus for services rendered is not allowable under the general provisions of section 37 of the Income-tax Act, 1961; however, if the assessee was able to satisfy the conditions laid down in the second proviso to section 36(1)(ii), it might be allowed as deduction under that section. In the instant case, there is no material to establish that the conditions set out in the second proviso of section ....