9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Whether the receipt of the car was 'a benefit' within the meaning of section 28(iv) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 2. Whether the assessee was carrying on a profession within the meaning of section 28(iv) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Summary: Issue 1: Whether the receipt of the car was 'a benefit' within the meaning of section 28(iv) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The court examined whether the car provided to the assessee by his disciples constituted a benefit under section 28(iv) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Income-tax Officer (ITO) had included the amount of Rs. 16,100, the cost of the car, in the assessee's income, arguing that the donations were made by followers who benefited from his preachings. The Appellate Tribunal, however, held that the car was provided to cover travel expenses and was not the assessee's personal or family property, thus not constituting income. The court disagreed with the Tribunal, stating that the car was indeed a benefit arising from the assessee's vocation of preaching Vedanta and should be taxable under section 28(iv). The court referenced the Supreme Court's decision in P. Krishna Menon v. CIT, which held that teaching Vedanta is a vocation, and benefits arising from it are taxable. The court concluded that the car's value, Rs. 16,100, should be treated as the value of the benefit and taxable as income. Issue 2: Whether the assessee was carrying on a profession within the meaning of section 28(iv) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The court considered whether the assessee's activities of giving discourses on Vedanta constituted a profession or vocation under section 28(iv) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The court noted that "profession" includes "vocation" and involves intellectual or manual skill controlled by intellectual skill. The court referenced the Supreme Court's decision in P. Krishna Menon v. CIT, which held that teaching Vedanta is a vocation. The court found that the assessee's activities of giving discourses on Vedanta, even without a profit motive, constituted a vocation. Therefore, the benefits arising from this activity, such as the car provided by his disciples, are taxable under section 28(iv). The court concluded that the assessee was carrying on a profession within the meaning of section 28(iv) and the receipt of the car was a taxable benefit. Conclusion: The court answered both questions in the affirmative, in favor of the revenue and against the assessee. The entire value of the car, Rs. 16,100, was deemed taxable as the value of the benefit. The revenue was entitled to costs assessed at Rs. 200.
|
