1980 (2) TMI 45 - HC - Income Tax

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Treatment of Rs. 4,45,618 as business profits.
2. Deductibility of Rs. 67,067 interest on income-tax arrears and Rs. 7,680 commission on borrowed shares.
3. Deductibility of Rs. 37,359 gratuity payable to employees.
4. Deductibility of Rs. 21,110 paid for debentures.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Treatment of Rs. 4,45,618 as Business Profits:
The primary issue was whether the amount of Rs. 4,45,618 realized by the assessee from the sale of gunny bags, which were initially contracted for packing cement, should be treated as business profits. The court held that the transactions arose as a normal incident of the assessee's business in the manufacture and sale of cement. The Tribunal's reasoning was upheld, stating that fluctuations in the prices of raw materials and stores, including packing materials, are a normal hazard of trade. The sale of gunny bags was considered part of the assessee's business operations, and thus, the profit from their sale was taxable as business income. The court rejected the contention that such profits were casual or non-recurring, emphasizing that they arose from the normal trading operations of the business.

2. Deductibility of Rs. 67,067 Interest on Income-Tax Arrears and Rs. 7,680 Commission on Borrowed Shares:
The court addressed whether the interest paid on income-tax arrears and the commission paid on shares borrowed for pledging as security against income-tax demands were permissible deductions. The court referred to its earlier judgment in I.T.R. 34/71 (Dalmia Dadri Cement Ltd. v. CIT [1980] 125 ITR 425), where it was held that the assessee was not entitled to these deductions. The court reaffirmed that the interest on income-tax arrears and the commission paid did not qualify as permissible deductions under the Income-tax Act, 1961.

3. Deductibility of Rs. 37,359 Gratuity Payable to Employees:
The court examined whether the provision for gratuity payable to employees under a scheme dated April 8, 1955, was a permissible deduction. The court referred to several decisions, including those of the Supreme Court and various High Courts, which established that a trader could deduct the present value of future gratuity liabilities if such value could be satisfactorily determined. The court held that the assessee was entitled to deduct the present value of the gratuity liability for the calendar year 1961, provided it was determined on an actuarial basis. The authorities were directed to allow the assessee an opportunity to establish the extent of the claim.

4. Deductibility of Rs. 21,110 Paid for Debentures:
The issue was whether the additional sum of Rs. 21,110 paid for purchasing its own debentures could be deducted as interest on borrowed capital. The court noted that the debentures retained their existence and were capable of reissue, as per Section 121 of the Companies Act, 1956. The court concluded that the entire payment made by the assessee was capital in nature and could not be treated as interest. The Tribunal's decision to disallow the deduction of Rs. 21,110 was upheld.

Summary of Answers:
1. Yes.
2. No.
3. Yes, but only to the extent indicated.
4. No.

In conclusion, the court affirmed the Tribunal's findings on all issues, emphasizing the principles of commercial accounting and the nature of business operations in determining the taxability and deductibility of various amounts.