Statutory business expenditure and reassessment limits shape deduction claims and bar fresh losses raised for the first time.

Statutory contributions made under a bank's bye-laws to designated welfare and development funds were held deductible as business expenditure because they were compulsory, incurred in the course of business, and spent wholly for business purposes under section 37(1). A payment linked to profits did not lose its character as expenditure. By contrast, a fresh claim for loss on sale of securities, raised for the first time in response to reassessment notice, was not entertainable because reassessment cannot be used to reopen an issue not covered by the original notice; the rule in Sun Engineering applied. The assessee therefore succeeded only on the fund contributions, not on the securities loss claim.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether contributions made under the bank's statutory bye-laws to the Common Good Fund, Special Assistance Fund, PACS/DCCB Fund and Rural Farmers Socio Economic Development Fund were allowable as business expenditure. (ii) Whether the additional claim of loss on sale of securities, made for the first time in response to notice under reassessment, could be entertained.

Issue (i): Whether contributions made under the bank's statutory bye-laws to the Common Good Fund, Special Assistance Fund, PACS/DCCB Fund and Rural Farmers Socio Economic Development Fund were allowable as business expenditure.

Analysis: The amounts were contributed under statutory and bye-law obligations and did not remain with the assessee or return to it in another form. A payment computed by reference to profits does not cease to be expenditure merely because it is profit-linked. The expression "for the purpose of business" in section 37(1) is wide enough to include statutory expenditure incurred in the course of carrying on the business, and the contributions here were made to further the bank's objects and business interests.

Conclusion: The contributions were allowable as deduction under section 37(1) and the disallowance was unsustainable.

Issue (ii): Whether the additional claim of loss on sale of securities, made for the first time in response to notice under reassessment, could be entertained.

Analysis: The claim was not part of the original assessment and was not an issue reopened by the notice under section 148. A concluded matter from the original assessment cannot be re-agitated in reassessment proceedings merely by raising a fresh or adjusted claim. The rule in Sun Engineering applied, and the assessee's remedy, if any, lay elsewhere under the Act.

Conclusion: The additional claim was not entertainable in reassessment and was rightly rejected.

Final Conclusion: Relief was granted on the expenditure relating to the statutory funds, but the reassessment-based claim for loss on sale of securities was rejected, resulting in only partial success for the assessee.

Ratio Decidendi: A statutory contribution incurred under binding bye-laws and spent wholly for the purposes of the business can be deductible as revenue expenditure under section 37(1), but a fresh claim not forming part of the original assessment cannot be introduced for the first time in reassessment proceedings.

---