1983 (8) TMI 112

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ncil of Medical Research. During the account year period relating to the assessment year before us, he received a scholarship of the value of 18,500 US dollars from the Department of Health, Education and Welfare, National Institute of Health, Maryland. In terms of Indian money the value came to Rs. 1,55,400. At the time of filing of the return he claimed 50 per cent of the money so received as ex....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... careful consideration of the facts and circumstances of the instant case I am of the opinion that the ratio of the Karnataka High Court judgment is fully applicable to the appellant's case. In this view of the matter, I hold that a sum of Rs. 1,55,400 cannot be brought to tax as it qualifies for exemption under section 10(16) of the Income-tax Act. The addition of Rs. 1,55,400 is, accordingly, de....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s)'s order being in accordance with law and as the assessee's case clearly falls under section 10(16) of the Act, the same calls for no interference. As regards the argument of the departmental representative that the assessee should not be taken to have any grievance in view of his returning the income, it was contended that the claim being in accordance with law, the assessee could not be preven....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... benefit under the relevant section, would amount to tripping up an unwary assessee which the law does not permit. While it is the duty of the revenue authorities to collect the legitimate tax, it is equally the duty of the authorities to allow all benefits to the assessees which are due to them under the law whether claimed or not. Claiming alone should not be a condition precedent for allowing. ....