2007 (7) TMI 238 - HC - Income Tax

Disallowance of the provisions for bonus - scope of power of AO conferred u/s 143(1) to make prima facie adjustment while computing the taxable income - AO had rightly added back the bonus provision as the assessee had not paid the amount within the due date for filing the returns and accordingly tribunal is justified in confirming the order of CIT that section 43B override section 36(1) - prima facie adjustment made u/s 143(1)(a) in respect of the bonus provision are valid

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Validity of prima facie adjustment under section 143(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act concerning the bonus provision of Rs. 33,35,984.
2. Scope of powers of the respondent in making prima facie adjustments in the computation of taxable total income under section 143(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Validity of Prima Facie Adjustment under Section 143(1)(a):

The appellant, an assessee, challenged the validity of the prima facie adjustment made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal concerning a bonus provision of Rs. 33,35,984. The appellant contended that the bonus payable to employees was an expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business. The Tribunal, however, confirmed the adjustment, stating that the bonus provision was not paid within the due date for filing returns, thus invoking section 43B of the Act, which overrides section 36(1). The Tribunal upheld the Assessing Officer's decision to add back the bonus provision, emphasizing the non obstante clause in section 43B that mandates actual payment for deductions.

2. Scope of Powers of the Respondent in Making Prima Facie Adjustments:

The core issue revolved around the scope of the respondent's power to make prima facie adjustments under section 143(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act. The court highlighted that section 43B, which overrides section 36(1), necessitates actual payment for deductions. Section 143(1)(a) allows for adjustments where deductions claimed are prima facie inadmissible based on the information available in the return. The court affirmed that the respondent was within their power to disallow the deduction for the bonus provision under section 143(1)(a), given the overriding effect of section 43B. The court concluded that the authorities had correctly interpreted the law, and there was no substantial question of law warranting interference.

Conclusion:

The court dismissed the appeal, holding that the respondent was justified in making the prima facie adjustment under section 143(1)(a) in light of section 43B overriding section 36(1). The decision reaffirmed the scope of the respondent's powers in disallowing deductions that are prima facie inadmissible based on the return's information.