9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Deduction on account of development rebate. 2. Inclusion of certain amounts in the total income. 3. Allowability of legal charges as revenue expenditure. Summary: Issue 1: Deduction on Account of Development Rebate The court addressed whether the assessee was entitled to a development rebate of Rs. 8,486 and Rs. 56,642 for the assessment years 1968-69 and 1970-71. The assessee, a company limited by guarantee, initially received a development rebate on air-conditioners used in office and residential premises, which was later disallowed by the ITO during reassessment. The AAC deleted the additions, but the Tribunal reinstated them, concluding that the air-conditioning equipment was installed in office premises, thus not eligible for rebate u/s 33(6) of the I.T. Act, 1961. The court agreed with the Tribunal, stating that the equipment was used in office premises for official work, and thus, the claim for development rebate was rightly negatived. The court answered the first question in the negative and against the assessee. Issue 2: Inclusion of Certain Amounts in the Total Income The second issue was whether amounts of Rs. 3,42,539 and Rs. 7,22,411 were includible in the total income of the assessee for the assessment years 1969-70 and 1970-71. The assessee claimed these amounts as deductions, arguing they were for charity from race day proceeds. The ITO included these amounts in the total income, a decision upheld by the AAC and the Tribunal. The Tribunal found no legal obligation to apply the collections to charity, thus no diversion of income by overriding title. The court upheld this view, noting the absence of unequivocal declarations or resolutions earmarking the collections for charity. The collections were considered part of the assessee's income, applied at its discretion. The court answered the second question against the assessee. Issue 3: Allowability of Legal Charges as Revenue Expenditure The third issue concerned the allowability of Rs. 6,556 incurred as legal charges for the assessment year 1971-72. The ITO disallowed this as capital expenditure, but the AAC allowed it, considering it a business expenditure. The Tribunal reversed the AAC's decision. The court, referencing CIT v. Bush Boake Allen (India) Ltd., concluded that legal expenses incurred for amalgamation, aimed at business efficiency and economy, were allowable as revenue expenditure. Thus, the court answered the third question in the affirmative and in favor of the assessee. Conclusion: The court ruled against the assessee on the first and second issues, confirming the disallowance of the development rebate and inclusion of the amounts in the total income. However, the court ruled in favor of the assessee on the third issue, allowing the legal charges as revenue expenditure. There was no order as to costs.
|
