Case Law Details
DCIT Vs. M/s. Enam Securities Pvt. Ltd (ITAT Mumbai)
it is duly noted that the assessee has submitted that the outstanding bonus was customary bonus and not filing u/s. 36(1)(ii) to come under the ambit of disallowance u/s. 43B(C). The assessee has quoted several case laws for the proposition that the customary bonus do not attract the rigors of provision of section 36(1)(ii) which are applicable to bonus payable under payment of Bonus Act.
Accordingly, we find that without giving a finding to the contrary in this regard, the A.O. has referred that the case laws quoted by the assessee were with regard to section 36(1)(ii) and, hence, not applicable. This is clearly a lack of application of mind by the A.O. The said case laws duly provide that the customary bonus do not attract the provision of section 36(1)(ii) and, hence, as a consequence they did not attract the disallowance u/s. 43B(c).
FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGEMENT
This appeal by the Revenue and cross objection by the assessee arise out of the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, Mumbai (‘ld.CIT(A) for short) dated 05.08 .2016 and pertains to the assessment year (A.Y.) 2008-09.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
