C.I.T. PATIALA vs. SHRI BHUPINDER SOOD
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court held that the question of law referred to it was covered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee by its previous judgments. Specifically, the Court referred to its decision in B.M.Parmar V. C.I.T. (1999) 235 ITR 679 and a more recent judgment dated 5.9.2006 in I.T.R. No.15 of 1995 (The Commissioner of Income Tax, Haryana, Rohtak Vs. Kamal Kishore Batra, DO, LIC, Kalanaur, Rohtak). In both these precedents, similar questions were answered in favour of the Revenue. Therefore, the High Court answered the referred question in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. The reference was disposed of accordingly. No specific amount in dispute was mentioned.
What were the facts?
The Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala (Revenue) filed an Income Tax Reference (ITR) No. 137 of 1995 before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. The reference arose from an order dated 3.4.1992 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Chandigarh Bench, in I.T.A.No.1178/Chandi/1991, concerning assessment year 1988-89. The dispute involved the deduction allowed to the assessee, Sh. Bhupinder Sood, Chandigarh, at 40% of incentive bonus. The High Court was asked to decide a question of law referred by the ITAT.
What were the issues?
1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstance of the case, the ITAT was right in law in allowing deduction @ 40% of incentive Bonus to the assessee? The Revenue contended that the issue was covered in its favour and against the assessee by this Court's judgment in B.M.Parmar V. C.I.T. (1999) 235 ITR 679. The Revenue also cited its recent judgment dated 5.9.2006 in I.T.R. No.15 of 1995 (The Commissioner of Income Tax, Haryana, Rohtak Vs. Kamal Kishore Batra, DO, LIC, Kalanaur, Rohtak), wherein the question was answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the assessee.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
JUDGMENT Following question of law has been referred for opinion of this Court by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh arising out of its order dated 3.4.1992 passed in I.T.A.No.1178/Chandi/1991, in respect of the assessment year 1988- 89. “Whether on the facts and in the circumstance of the case, the ITAT was right in law in allowing deduction @ 40% of incentive Bonus to the assessee? Judge
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Nirmal Kumar Sharma S/O Ram Swroop Sharma vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 16 Oct 2026
- Sh Umang Uniyal vs. Commissioner Department Of Central Goods And Services TaxUttarakhand · 16 Oct 2026
- Paresh Textiles Prop Paresh Gudhka vs. Superintendent Range Iv Div VBombay · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Palladium Constructions PVT LTD. vs. Principal Commissioner Of Central TaxKarnataka · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Vk Construction vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - IiMadras · 15 Oct 2026
