Cit Vs. C. Babbington

Cit vs C. Babbington

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Dec 12, 2002

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/710751

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/710751
Court: Delhi High Court
Decided On: Dec 12, 2002
Case Number: IT Ref. No. 407 of 1992 12 December 2002
Subject: Direct Taxation

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

In the Delhi High Court D.K. Jain & Mahmood Ali Khan, JJ. -

Key legal issue: Direct Taxation

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Cit

Advocate R.C. Pandey and; Ajay Jha,;for the Revenue; V.U. Eradi,

Respondent

C. Babbington

Legal References

Reported In: [2003]130TAXMAN579(Delhi)

Excerpt

in the delhi high court d.k. jain & mahmood ali khan, jj. - orderd.k. jain, j.at the instance of the revenue, the income tax appellate tribunal, delhi bench-e has referred under section 256(1) of the income tax act, 1961 the following question for the opinion of this court :'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was right in holding that the living allowance was exempt under section 10(14) of the income tax act, 1961 ?'2. we have heard learned counsel for the parties.3. as is apparent from the format of the question, the issue arising for consideration is as to whether the living allowance received by a foreign technician is exempt under section 10(14) of the act. since the issue is purely legal, we deem it unnecessary to state the facts.4. answer to the question stands concluded by the decision of the apex court in cit v. goslino mario : [2000]241itr312(sc) , wherein it has been held that the rupee payment taken in india in the shape of daily allowances for the foreign technician is exempt under section 10(14) of the act. in view of the said authorities pronouncement, our answer to the question referred is in the affirmative, i.e., in favor of the assessed and against the revenue.5. the reference stands disposed of with no order as to costs.

Full Judgment

ORDER

D.K. Jain, J.

At the instance of the revenue, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench-E has referred under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 the following question for the opinion of this court :

'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the living allowance was exempt under section 10(14) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ?'

2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.

3. As is apparent from the format of the question, the issue arising for consideration is as to whether the living allowance received by a foreign technician is exempt under section 10(14) of the Act. Since the issue is purely legal, we deem it unnecessary to state the facts.

4. Answer to the question stands concluded by the decision of the Apex Court in CIT v. Goslino Mario : [2000]241ITR312(SC) , wherein it has been held that the rupee payment taken in India in the shape of daily allowances for the foreign technician is exempt under section 10(14) of the Act. In view of the said authorities pronouncement, our answer to the question referred is in the affirmative, i.e., in favor of the assessed and against the revenue.

5. The reference stands disposed of with no order as to costs.

Same Court & Year Delhi · 2002 Same Parties Cit vs C. Babbington Same Subject Direct Taxation

Direct Taxation