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%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the assessee could, at the stage of giving effect to an appellate order, shift from a claim for deduction under section 80G to an alternative claim that the same payments were deductible as business expenditure under section 37(1), and whether the revenue's objection based on the alleged exclusivity of section 80G was sustainable.
Analysis: The assessment stood open for giving effect to the appellate order, and the assessee was therefore not confined to the original characterisation of the payments. The claim under section 80G had already been made, and the assessee merely sought an alternative mode of relief in respect of the same expenditure. No statutory prohibition prevented an alternative claim under section 37(1). The doctrine of generalia specialibus non derogant did not bar the claim, since there was no legislative indication that section 80G excluded consideration under section 37(1) in the circumstances.
Conclusion: The assessee was entitled to have the nature of the payments examined under section 37(1), and the revenue's objection failed.
Final Conclusion: The revenue's appeal was without merit, and the assessee's claim for consideration of deduction as business expenditure was upheld.
Ratio Decidendi: When an assessment is reopened or adjusted to give effect to an appellate order, the assessee may raise an alternative statutory claim for the same item of expenditure unless the Act expressly bars such recourse.