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>Business reputation defense costs deductible under Indian Income-tax Act</h1> <h3>Commissioner of Income-tax Versus H. Hirjee</h3> The Calcutta High Court ruled in favor of the assessee, allowing the deduction of expenses incurred in defending criminal proceedings under Section ... - Issues:Interpretation of Section 10(2)(xv) of the Indian Income-tax Act regarding the deduction of expenses incurred in defending criminal proceedings for the purpose of business.Detailed Analysis:1. Framing of Question:The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Calcutta Bench, referred a question to the Calcutta High Court regarding the allowability of the sum spent on defending criminal proceedings as a business expenditure under Section 10(2)(xv) of the Indian Income-tax Act.2. Background of the Case:The assessee, a distributor, was prosecuted for selling goods at unreasonable prices by Enforcement Authorities. He defended himself, incurring a sum of Rs. 10,895, which he claimed as a business expense deduction.3. Legal Provision:Section 10(2)(xv) allows deductions for expenditure laid out or expended wholly and exclusively for business purposes, excluding capital or personal expenses.4. Income-tax Officer's Decision:Initially, the Income-tax Officer disallowed the claimed amount as an allowance, but the decision was reversed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and upheld by the Appellate Tribunal.5. Contention and Tribunal's Finding:The argument was made that the expenditure was not solely for business purposes but to avoid imprisonment or fines. However, the Tribunal found that the defense was primarily to maintain the business's reputation and protect the stock-in-trade, disregarding the fear of punishment.6. Tribunal's Conclusion:The Tribunal emphasized that in defending criminal proceedings to safeguard business reputation, the fear of penalties is inherent. They concluded that the expenses were solely for business purposes, as protecting the business's name was the main objective.7. Comparison with Bombay High Court's Decision:The judgment referred to a Bombay High Court case where it was established that if expenses were incurred to protect the business's reputation and met certain criteria, they could be considered wholly and exclusively for business purposes.8. Decision of the Calcutta High Court:The High Court concurred with the Tribunal's finding that the expenses were incurred solely to protect the business's reputation and stock-in-trade. Consequently, the claimed amount was allowed as a deduction under Section 10(2)(xv).9. Final Verdict:The Court answered the referred question in the affirmative, ruling in favor of the assessee and granting costs for the reference, certifying for two counsel. Both judges, Harries, CJ, and Banerjee, J, agreed on the decision.This detailed analysis of the judgment showcases the interpretation and application of Section 10(2)(xv) of the Indian Income-tax Act in allowing the deduction of expenses related to defending criminal proceedings for the purpose of business.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
