THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX III, vs. M/S. SAVIJANA SEA FOODS PVT. LTD.,

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: J SREENIVAS RAO,ALOK ARADHE

capital gains‟ in their hands in their returns would not be relevant in deciding the issue whether the payment by the Assessee should be treated as „business expenditure.‟ As explained by the Madras High Court in CIT v. Sarda Binding Works 102 ITR 187 (Mad), it is the point of view of the payer which is relevant. 37. The decision

M/s Durga Granites, vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 1,

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

55 3. The Director, Mines Directorate, Department of Mines and Geology, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Yojna Bhawan, office at Yojna Bhawan, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District Ranchi (Jharkhand), PIN 834 002. 4. Deputy Commissioner, Pakur, having its Office at District Collectorate, Pakur, P.O. and P.S. Pakur, District Pakur (Jharkhand) 5. District Mining Officer, Pakur, having its office