Allowed

The Commissioner of Income Tax, Vidarbha, Nagpur v. Shri T.R.Lahoti, Amraoti

Bombay HC13 Apr 2007ITA/108/1996

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court treated reference applications under Section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act as statements of the case by consent. The Court answered references in favor of the Revenue, upholding the Tribunal's classification of incentive bonus as professional income based on CIT vs. Gopalkrishna Suri.

What did the court decide?

References answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee.

The Commissioner of Income Tax, Vidarbha, Nagpur Vs Shri… — Income Tax | Bombay HC (2007)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

¶3

INCOME TAX APPLICATION NOs. 28, 29 & 108 OF 1996

¶4

The Commissioner of Income-tax, Vidarbha, Nagpur. :: APPLICANT

¶5

-: Versus :-

¶6

T. R. Lahoti, Amravati. :: RESPONDENT

¶7

CORAM : J. P. DEVADHAR AND B. P. DHARMADHIKARI, JJ. DATED : 13TH APRIL, 2007.

¶8

P. C. :

¶9

All these reference applications under Section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are filed by the Revenue against the order of the Tribunal declining to refer the following questions of law for the opinion of this Court:

¶10

(1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the incentive bonus does not form part of income assessable as 'salary'?

¶11

(2)Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the income from incentive bonus constitutes income from 'Profession' and allowing expenses to the tune of 40% thereof?

¶12

¶13

(3) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in applying the ratio as laid down by the Bombay High Court in the decision reported in 197-ITR-717 ?

¶14

(4) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in not applying the ratio as laid down by the Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of K.A. Choudhary vs. CIT reported at 183-ITR-29 (AP)?

¶15

Since the questions raised in these applications are covered by the judgment of this Court, by consent of the parties, these applications are treated as statement of the case and taken up for final hearing.

¶16

Learned Counsel for the respective parties fairly submits that the questions raised herein are covered by the judgment of this Court in the case of C.I.T. vs. Gopalkrishna Suri reported in 248 ITR 819 in favour of the Revenue. Accordingly, the references are answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. The reference applications are disposed of accordingly.

¶17

No order as to costs.

¶18

JUDGE

¶19

JUDGE

¶20

WWL

The Commissioner of Income Tax, Vidarbha, Nagpur v. Shri T.R.Lahoti, Amraoti

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Commissioner of Income Tax, Vidarbha, Nagpur v. Shri T.R.Lahoti, Amraoti

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Commissioner of Income Tax II Nagpur Vs Sadruddin Habibhai Jiwani Pandharkawda

The Commissioner of Income Tax II Vs Abdullah Jan Mohd.Gilani

Omprakash Jagdishprasad Agrawal Vs the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax.

The Commissioner of Incometax,Vidarbha,Nagpur. Vs Shri Rajesh Jaiswal,L/H of Late Shri Matadin Jais.

The Commissioner of Income Tax,Nagpur Vs Tr.Lahoti,Amravati

The Commissioner of Income Tax,Nagpur Vs Tr.Lahoti,Amravati