9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Interpretation of business expenditure u/s 80G for community assistance program and proximity of welfare measures to manufacturing units.
Interpretation of business expenditure u/s 80G: The Revenue appealed under s. 260A of the IT Act questioning the Tribunal's decision to treat expenditure on community assistance program as business expenditure instead of a deduction u/s 80G. The assessee, engaged in yarn and thread manufacturing, claimed &8377; 5,61,668 as business expenditure for the asst. yr. 1989-90. The AO disallowed it, citing philanthropy over commercial expediency. The CIT(A) upheld the disallowance, but the Tribunal, considering the proximity of welfare measures to manufacturing units, allowed the expenditure based on previous orders. The Division Bench's judgment in CIT vs. Madras Refineries Ltd. (2004) supported this view, emphasizing the evolving concept of business to include community care. The High Court concurred, ruling in favor of the assessee. Proximity of welfare measures to manufacturing units: The Tribunal's decision to allow the expenditure was influenced by the welfare measures being carried out near the assessee's manufacturing units, benefiting employees. The Division Bench's judgment highlighted the positive impact of such initiatives on local goodwill and business success, especially for polluting industries. The High Court, aligning with this reasoning, upheld the Tribunal's decision, emphasizing the importance of community assistance programs for corporate citizenship and business reputation. Conclusion: The High Court dismissed the Revenue's appeal, citing the Division Bench's judgment and the evolving concept of business to include community welfare. The expenditure on community assistance programs near manufacturing units was deemed allowable as business expenditure, emphasizing the importance of corporate social responsibility and positive community impact.
|
