2001 (4) TMI 60

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Act, 1961, this court has directed the Tribunal to refer the following question, set out at page 2 of the application, for our opinion: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the liability arising in the relevant previous year under the Payment of Gratuity Act has to be allowed as deduction irrespective of the fact whether....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f the employee. He accordingly disallowed the claim of deduction for Rs. 3,11,036. In appeal, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), following the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Shree Sajjan Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1985] 156 ITR 585, confirmed the disallowance. In appeal before the Tribunal, the Tribunal has allowed the claim of the assessee. The Tribunal has set aside the order of the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sult in double deduction. That cannot be the intention of the Legislature. To remove this doubt, the Legislature has inserted the Explanation in sub-section (7) of section 40A of the Act, which reads as under: "For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that where any provision made by the assessee for the payment of gratuity to his employees on their retirement or on termination of their....