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 amount borne by the assessee under a contractual arrangement with an insurance company, described as its share of service tax liability, was allowable as a deduction under section 37 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, or was hit by Explanation 1 to that section as an expenditure for an offence or one prohibited by law.
Analysis: The amount was paid pursuant to a contractual arrangement under which the assessee agreed to bear 50% of the service tax component linked to commission income from insurance auxiliary services. The underlying statutory liability for service tax rested on the recipient under the reverse charge mechanism, and the assessee was not itself the person on whom the tax liability was cast by law. The payment was found to be incurred to secure and retain business and to earn commission income, and there was no specific legal prohibition against such a contractual sharing arrangement. The fact that the recipient had not deposited the tax with the Government did not change the character of the assessee's expenditure, since any default in that regard was attributable to the recipient and not to the assessee.
Conclusion: The disallowance was unsustainable. The amount was allowable as business expenditure under section 37 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and the assessee succeeded.