1998 (12) TMI 77

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in allowing extra-shift allowance on transformers, electric substation and electric motors which are stationary installations ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in allowing guest house expenses when they are not allowable as per section 37(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? According to the Revenue these questions do arise from the order of the Tribunal dated March 31, 1997 in the case of the assessee for the assessment year 1985-86. In response to the notice of motion Mr. Sanjay Bansal, Advocate, appearing with Mr. B. S. Gupta, Senior Advocate, has put in appearance for the assessee. According to the learned ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dismissed. Mr. Bansal, placing strong reliance on Radhasoami Satsang v. CIT [1992] 193 ITR 321 (SC) ; CIT v. Murugappa Chettiar (S.) [1992] 197 ITR 575 (Ker); CIT v. Kshma Tandon (Smt.) [1992] 194 ITR 751 (All) and CIT v. Modipon Ltd. (No. 2) [1995] 212 ITR 656 (Delhi), submitted that even on the principle of constructive res judicata this petition deserves to be dismissed as the Revenue did not either seek a reference under section 256 or it was declined. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the record. As regards question No. 2 relating to guest house expenses, we are of the opinion that this question is not a referable question of law. The Revenue has either accepted the view of the Income-tax Appellat....