9911796707
|
Home
Issues: Determination of deductibility of amount paid by the applicant company on account of an employee as business expenditure under the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Analysis: The case involved a reference made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal seeking an opinion on the deductibility of an amount paid by the applicant firm on account of an employee, Mr. J. Pol, as business expenditure. The employee, a Polish technician, was engaged by the assessee-company for maintenance purposes. The company deducted tax from his salary, but later it was found that the exemption granted to the employee was incorrect, leading to a demand of Rs. 26,728. The company paid this amount in terms of a guarantee given by it and claimed it as a deduction from its business income. The Tribunal directed further investigation into specific aspects, including the liability on the company, efforts made to recover the amount from the employee, and the availability of the guarantee deed. After remand, the Income Tax Officer rejected the claim, stating that the payment was not deductible as business expenditure. This decision was upheld by the Appellate Authority and the Tribunal in subsequent appeals. The key question was whether the payment made by the company in pursuance of the guarantee constituted a business expenditure under section 37 of the Income Tax Act. The court referred to precedents where payments made to discharge legal obligations arising from business were allowed as deductions. However, in this case, the obligation did not arise from the business of furnishing guarantees for tax liabilities of employees. Citing relevant case law, the court emphasized that the company's failure to deduct tax at source made it a deemed assessee in default, disqualifying the amount paid as a deduction under section 37. The court concluded that the payment made by the applicant-company on account of the employee was not for its business purposes and therefore not allowable as business expenditure. In light of the above analysis, the court held in favor of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal's decision, answering the reference against the assessee and directing the assessee to bear the costs of the reference.
|
