TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2002 (1) TMI 1306
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e from his former employer on Voluntary Retirement was a capital receipt and, therefore, not taxable, without appreciating the specific provisions of section 17(3)(i) of the Income-tax Act in this regard and without considering that the case cited by him in arriving at his decision apply to cases of "business" and not to "Salaried" professionals, in whose cases, the provisions of section 17(3)(i) are clearly attracted." 3. The assessee is a management and technical consultant. He is the proprietor of a firm, Profitech. His main activities are consultancy services in the areas of software, business strategies, human resources development and software exports, etc. Prior to starting his own business, the assessee was employed, since 2-4-19....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....T v. Saraswathi Publicities [1981] 132 ITR 207 (Mad.). 9. The learned Assessing Officer did not accept such reliance, observing that these cases related to business income, whereas the assessee was a professional. 10. While rejecting the claim of the assessee, the learned Assessing Officer further observed that by virtue of the agreement dated 26-2-1990 between the assessee and TUL, the assessee was free to render professional services to, and earn income by way of fees from persons other than those stipulated therein, which the assessee did. 11. It was held that even otherwise, the amount in question was taxable under the head 'Salaries', in view of the provisions of section 17(3)(i ) of the Income-tax Act, which include profit in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Government of India has been relied upon on behalf of the assessee. The paragraph 'Modification in respect of the provisions relating to salaries and perquisites' states, inter alia that the Finance Bill, 2001 also proposes to provide that 'profits in lieu of salary' include amounts received in lump sum or otherwise, prior to employment or after cessation of employment for the purposes of taxation. Our attention has been drawn to the last sentence of this paragraph. This sentence reads: 'The proposed amendment shall come into affect from 1st April, 2002 and shall, accordingly, apply to assessment year 2002-2003 and subsequent years'. 17. The assessee relies on : (i) M.N. Karani v. Asstt. CIT [1998] 64 ITD 119 (Mum.); ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t erroneous, wrong and bad construction to read into the provision that which its plain language does not state. The intention of the Legislature in not including the present situation within the ambit of the section is explicitly manifest in the syntax chosen. 20. The legislative intent of excluding situations like the present one from the purview of section 17(3)(i) is further evident from the latest amendment of section 17. It runs as under : 17(3) "profits in lieu of salary" includes- (iii)any amount due to or received, whether in lump sum or otherwise, by any assessee from any person- (B)after cessation of his employment with that person. 21. It is precisely because such a situation was neither envisage....