9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (11) TMI 947X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cular was to discourage creation of bogus trust for the purpose of availing deduction only - the assessee contributed the amount to the staff benevolent fund which was created for the benefit of the staff and family members – relying upon the Circular No. 307 issued by CBDT on 06.07.1904 and Cheran Engineering Corporation Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income tax [1998 (2) TMI 74 - MADRAS High Court] – Section 40A(9) is not applicable – thus, the order of the Tribunal is upheld – Decided against revenue - TAX APPEAL NO. 171 of 2000 - - - Dated:- 18-11-2014 - MR. KS JHAVERI AND MR. K.J.THAKER, JJ. MR NITIN K MEHTA, ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT MR JP SHAH, ADVOCATE FOR THE RESPONDENT ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Tribunal has erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance of ₹ 14 lakhs made under section 40A(9) being contribution to staff benevolent fund. He has drawn the attention of this Court to the definition of section 40A(9) and submitted that when the language of the provision is unambiguous and clear, there is no question of taking help from circulars and extraneous matters. In support of his submissions, Mr. Mehta has relied upon the following decisions: (I) Yashasvi Yarn Limited vs. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in [2013] 350 ITR 208(SC); (II) Sandur Manganese and Iron Ores ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in [2102] 349 ITR 386(SC); (III) Tata Iron Steel Co. Ltd ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessee maintained complete accounts of the fund and also got it audited regularly. From the records, it is borne out that the major expenditure during the year in question was as under: Expenditure Rs. (In 1000) Cultural Programme 5 Death Assistance 51 Educational Assistance 205 Gifts 735 Honorarium 3 Medical Assistance 4 Note book (for students of employees) 269 Tournaments 20 T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... decisions cited by learned advocates for both the sides. We do not find that the decisions cited by learned advocate for the revenue shall be applicable to the facts and circumstances of the present case. The Apex Court in the case of Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd (supra) has held as under: 5. For the aforestated assessment year 1985-86, the Assessing Officer disallowed ₹ 2,60,283 under Section 40A(9) paid by the assessee for staff welfare activities. The assessee claimed that the entire amount was for staff welfare activity. That, the said amount was a grant for staff welfare activity and that the entire amount was for the benefit of the employees and, therefore, the assessee claimed deduction as business expend ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
