1989 (3) TMI 57

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... in holding that the amount of capital subsidy received by the assessee from the Madhya Pradesh Financial Corporation would not be deductible from the cost of the assets for allowing depreciation and investment allowance thereon in terms of section 43(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in admitting the claim for weighted deduction under section 35B of the Income-tax Act on the commission paid by the assessee to the Indian agents totalling Rs. 93,307 ?" The material facts giving rise to this reference, briefly, are as follows The assessee is a limited company deriving income from manufacture and sale of steel tubes. During the assessment year in q....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eferred to this court for its opinion. Now, so far as question No. 1 is concerned, learned counsel for the parties conceded that the matter was concluded by a decision of this court in CIT v. Bhandari Capacitors P. Ltd. [1987] 168 ITR 647. Following that decision, therefore, it must be held that the Tribunal was justified in holding that the amount of capital subsidy received by the assessee from the Madhya Pradesh Financial Corporation would not be deductible from the cost of the assets for allowing depreciation and investment allowance under section 43(1) of the Act. Our answer to question No. 1 referred to this court is, therefore, in the affirmative and against the Revenue. As regards question No. 2, learned counsel for the Revenu....