TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether creation of a reserve in compliance with section 17 of the Banking Companies Act satisfied the statutory conditions for allowance of development rebate under section 10(2)(vib), proviso (b), of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922; (ii) Whether pensions paid to a former general manager during the relevant assessment years were deductible as expenditure laid out wholly and exclusively for the purposes of the business under section 10(2)(xv) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922.
Issue (i): Whether creation of a reserve in compliance with section 17 of the Banking Companies Act satisfied the statutory conditions for allowance of development rebate under section 10(2)(vib), proviso (b), of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922.
Analysis: The statutory condition for development rebate required a specific debit to the profit and loss account and a corresponding credit to a reserve account, so that the revenue could trace and verify the use of the reserve for business purposes over the prescribed period. Compliance with the reserve requirements of the Banking Companies Act did not by itself meet this distinct income-tax requirement, especially where the reserve was not earmarked for the tax purpose and remained unavailable for other purposes until the banking reserve reached the statutory threshold.
Conclusion: The reserve created under the Banking Companies Act did not amount to compliance with the condition in proviso (b) to Explanation 2 to section 10(2)(vib), and the claim for development rebate failed.
Issue (ii): Whether pensions paid to a former general manager during the relevant assessment years were deductible as expenditure laid out wholly and exclusively for the purposes of the business under section 10(2)(xv) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922.
Analysis: The absence of a general pension scheme was not ative by itself. The decisive consideration was whether the expenditure was incurred as a matter of business expediency and in the interests of the business. The pension arrangement was resolved upon while the officer was still in service and was linked to continued service interests, including a restriction against employment with competing banking institutions. On that footing, the payment bore the character of a business expenditure rather than a mere ex gratia payment.
Conclusion: The pension payments were allowable as expenditure laid out wholly and exclusively for the purposes of the business, and the claim succeeded.
Final Conclusion: The reference was answered against the assessee on the development rebate question and in favour of the assessee on the pension deduction question, resulting in a mixed outcome.
Ratio Decidendi: A reserve created for one statutory purpose does not satisfy a separate tax condition requiring a specific debit and credit entry, and a pension paid under an in-service arrangement may be deductible if it is incurred on grounds of commercial expediency in the interests of the business.
TaxTMI 
