Suhrid Geigy Ltd. vs Commissioner of Income Tax

G.T. Nanavati, J.—The following two questions have been referred to this Court by the Tribunal under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961, at the instance of the assessee :

"(1) Whether, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the assessee was not entitled to claim gratuity liability of Rs. 11,74,901 under s. 28 and/or s. 37 of the IT Act, 1961 ?

(2) Whether, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the assessee was not entitled to claim amount of Rs. 9,798 as depreciation on capital expenditure on scientific research ?"

The points which arise as a result of these questions are now covered by the decisions of the Supreme Court. The question regarding is covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in Shree Sajjan Mills Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, M.P., Bhopal and Another, and the question regarding depreciation on capital expenditure on scientific research is concluded by the decision of the Supreme Court in Escort Ltd. vs. Union of India,. We, therefore, answer both the questions in the affirmative that is - against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue. Reference is disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs.