9911796707
TMI Blog1985 (9) TMI 45X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The assessment years with which we are concerned are 1970-71 and 1971-72, the relevant accounting periods being the financial years ended on March 31, 1970, and March 31, 1971. The assessee was an employee of Goodlass Nerolac Paints Ltd., Bombay, and was getting a salary income of Rs. 34,380 per year. The said company had instituted a scholarship scheme for the benefit of the children of the managing staff in respect of their education. The grant of scholarships was in the sole and uncontrolled discretion of the company and no member of the managing staff had any right to claim such scholarships for his children. The scholarships were not available for children who had failed in the annual examination or who discontinued their education. It was provided that the scholarships would terminate on the child attaining the age of 21 years. The amount of scholarship was Rs. 100 per month per child subject to the maximum of two children of any member of the managing staff. The scholarship was payable to the children and not to any member of the managing staff. There is no reference in the terms of employment of the assessee to any such scholarship scheme. Two children of the assessee betwe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Revenue that due to the receipt of the said scholarship, the educational expenses of his said two children which had to be paid by the assessee were reduced to the extent of Rs. 2,400 in each of the said two assessment years and hence this amount could be treated as a perquisite received by the assessee under the provisions of section 17(2)(iv) of the Income-tax Act. The Tribunal pointed out that if the Revenue wanted to rest its case under section 17(2)(iv), it should have brought on record material to show that the assessee would have spent Rs. 100 per month on the education of each of the said two children. No such material had been brought on record and hence the Tribunal took the view that the said sum could not be characterised as paid by the employer in respect of an obligation which, but for such payment, would have been payable by the assessee. The argument made by the Revenue under section 17(2)(iii) was rejected on the aforesaid ground. It is from this decision that question No. 1 has been referred to us. The Commissioner made two applications to the Tribunal for referring the said question in two respective assessment years. Question No. 2 has been referred by the T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction, claim or demand whatsoever against the company or the board in respect of the grant of scholarship under the scheme. Clause 6 provides that the company shall be entitled to terminate the scheme or discontinue the grant of scholarships in any individual case or cases. Clause 7 provides that in order to be eligible for the grant of scholarship, the children had to be admitted to a school or an educational institution approved by the company. Clause 9 provides that no scholarship would be granted to children of the managing stall who had completed 21 years of age. Clause II lays down that any scholarship which may be granted by the company under the Scheme would be payable to the children of the managing staff and not to the managing staff. In cases where the recipient children had not attained the age of majority, it was provided that special bank accounts would be opened in the names of their respective mothers or legal guardians into which the amount of the scholarship would be credited. Analysis of this scheme clearly shows that there was no right created in favour of any employee against the company for any scholarship being paid to his children. The scholarship was paid e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at was held was that in every case, it is only the party applying for a reference who is entitled to specify the question of law which should be referred. Where the order of the Tribunal under section 254 of the Income-tax Act has decided the appeal partly against one party and partly against the other, the party who is aggrieved and who desires a reference to the High Court must file a reference application. It is not open to him to make a reference application filed by the other party the basis of his claim that a question of law sought by him should be referred. Where, however, the order made by the Tribunal operates entirely in favour of one party, although in the course of making the order the Tribunal may have negatived some points of law raised by that party, not being a party aggrieved by the result of the appeal, it is not open to that party to file a reference application. On a reference application being filed by the aggrieved party, it is open to the non-applicant to ask for a reference of those questions of law which arise on its submissions negatived in the appeal by the Tribunal. In the case before us it is quite clear that the entire appeal before the Tribunal was d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
