| The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 4194 (SC) : (2020) 272 TAXMAN 0022 INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 261 Section 37(1)
Where the Department preferred SLP to appeal against the judgment of Rajasthan High Court in CIT v. Genus Overseas Electronics [ITA No 327/2005, ITA Nos. 615, 638/2008, ITA Nos. 300, 303, 640/2009, dated 21-3-2017] of Rajasthan High Court, whereby the High Court held that there was no evidence or material, except suspicion or a surmise that the commission payment, in fact, represented illegal gratification paid to unknown oficers and therefore, should not be allowed as a deduction and further, evidence existed to show and establish nature of services actually rendered by various agents, who were ineracting with SEB and electricity companies, the Supreme Court dismissed the SLP as withdrawn due to low tax effect, however, leaving question(s) of law open.
|
Appeal (Supreme Court) - Special leave petition - Buisness expenditure - Commission and brokerage claimed without having buisness nexus-Allowability of
Department preferred SLP to appeal against the judgment of Rajasthan High Court in CIT v. Genus Overseas Electronics [ITA No 327/2005, ITA Nos. 615, 638/2008, ITA Nos. 300, 303, 640/2009, dated 21-3-2017] of Rajasthan High Court, whereby the High Court held that there was no evidence or material, except suspicion or a surmise that the commission payment, in fact, represented illegal gratification paid to unknown oficers and therefore, should not be allowed as a deduction and further, evidence existed to show and establish nature of services actually rendered by various agents, who were ineracting with SEB and electricity companies.Held: Counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, issued by the Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance vide F.No. 390/Misc/116/2017-JC, dated 22-8-2019 sought permission to withdraw this special leave petition along with pending applications therein due to low tax effect. Permission was granted, subject to just exceptions. The special leave petition and pending applications were dismissed as withdrawn, leaving question(s) of law open.
REFERRED :
FAVOUR : SLP dismissed.
A.Y. :
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
OR Try Reload the Page |