TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>High Court directs Tribunal to reevaluate bonus payment deductibility case under Income-tax Act section 36(1)(ii)</h1> <h3>Commissioner Of Income-Tax Versus Thomas Stephen And Co. Limited</h3> Commissioner Of Income-Tax Versus Thomas Stephen And Co. Limited - [1991] 189 ITR 736, 63 TAXMANN 34 Issues:- Interpretation of section 36(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act regarding deductibility of bonus paid to workers.- Application of previous court decisions on similar matters.- Evaluation of the decision made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal.Analysis:The judgment by the High Court of Kerala involved a question of law referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal regarding the applicability of section 36(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act to a company's deduction claim for bonus paid to workers. The company, the respondent, paid a bonus during the relevant previous year, and the Income-tax Officer disallowed it, claiming it related to prior years. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) allowed the deduction, stating that the liability arose from an agreement in the current year. The Appellate Tribunal upheld this decision, finding the bonus to be contractual and not hit by the first proviso to section 36(1)(ii). The court noted that previous decisions had considered the impact of this section and set out conditions for deductibility, including reasonableness based on pay, profits, and industry practice. The Tribunal's failure to evaluate the matter based on these principles led the court to direct a re-evaluation of the case.The court emphasized that even if the bonus was contractual, it must meet the criteria of section 36(1)(ii) for deduction. It found the Tribunal's decision unsatisfactory as it did not specifically address the requirements set by previous court decisions. As a result, the court declined to answer the referred question but directed the Tribunal to reconsider the case in light of the established principles from earlier Bench decisions. The Tribunal was instructed to assess the matter based on these precedents and, if deemed necessary, remit the case to the assessing authority for further evaluation. The judgment concluded by disposing of the reference and ordering the forwarding of a copy to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench for action.
TaxTMI 