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>Court ruling on employee benefits, overseas branches, and tea export deductions.</h1> <h3>Bombay Burmah Trading Corporation Limited Versus Commissioner Of Income-Tax</h3> The court ruled in favor of the Revenue for the interpretation of section 40(c)(iii)/40(a)(v) regarding benefits provided to employees. However, the court ... Business Expenditure, Company, Disallowance, Export Market Development Allowance, Weighted Deduction Issues:1. Interpretation of section 40(c)(iii)/40(a)(v) regarding the valuation of benefits or amenities provided by the employer to employees.2. Applicability of section 40(c)(iii)/40(a)(v) to employees in overseas branches.3. Eligibility of weighted deduction under section 35B for expenditure on export of tea from East Africa to the United Kingdom.Analysis:1. The first and second questions raised in the judgment pertain to the interpretation of section 40(c)(iii)/40(a)(v) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The court referred to a previous judgment and concluded that the value of benefits or amenities provided to employees should be considered in the hands of the employee, not the entire expenditure incurred by the employer. Following the precedent, the court ruled in favor of the Revenue for the first question and in favor of the assessee for the second question.2. The third question addressed the eligibility of weighted deduction under section 35B for expenditure on the export of tea from East Africa to the United Kingdom. The Income-tax Officer and the Appellate Assistant Commissioner held that the deduction was only available if exports were made from India. However, the court disagreed, stating that the provision did not specify that the export had to be from India. The court analyzed the relevant provisions of section 35B and concluded that the language was clear and unambiguous, entitling the assessee to the deduction for the expenditure incurred on services outside India in connection with the execution of a contract for the supply of tea in the United Kingdom.3. In summary, the court answered the third question in the affirmative and in favor of the assessee, allowing the weighted deduction under section 35B for the expenditure on the export of tea from East Africa to the United Kingdom. The judgment emphasized the plain language of the provision and rejected the argument that exports had to be made from India to qualify for the deduction.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
