9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Interpretation of entertainment expenditure under section 37(2A) of the Income Tax Act for providing tea, coffee, and soft drinks to customers. Analysis: The case involved a dispute regarding the deductibility of expenses incurred by an assessee in providing tea, coffee, and soft drinks to customers under section 37(2A) of the Income Tax Act. The assessee, a transport business, claimed these expenses were necessary for business promotion and relationship maintenance, not entertainment. The Income Tax Officer (ITO) disallowed the claim, considering it as entertainment expenditure. The Appellate Tribunal, however, allowed the expenses, stating they were not lavish and customary in the trade. The Commissioner of Income Tax challenged this decision, arguing that hospitality expenses, including providing beverages to customers, fall under entertainment expenditure as per the Act. The court analyzed the relevant provisions, including section 37(1) allowing deductions for business-related expenses. It highlighted the historical amendments, such as the insertion of Explanation (2) in section 37(2A) clarifying entertainment expenditure, effective from April 1, 1976. The court noted that hospitality expenses provided to anyone other than employees, even based on trade custom, are considered entertainment expenditure. The wide language of the Explanation encompassed various forms of hospitality, emphasizing that expenses on customers or guests are not deductible under section 37(1). The assessee argued that expenses on beverages were also provided to employees and were customary in the trade. However, the court reiterated that post the Explanation's insertion, such expenses, when not for employees, constitute entertainment expenditure. The court concluded that providing tea, coffee, and soft drinks to customers falls under entertainment expenditure, as per section 37(2A) and Explanation (2). Therefore, the expenses claimed were disallowed, ruling in favor of the Revenue and against the assessee. The judgment emphasized the clear legislative intent to disallow such expenses as deductible under the Income Tax Act.
|
