Just a moment...

Top
Help
Upgrade to AI Search

We've upgraded AI Search on TaxTMI with two powerful modes:

1. Basic
Quick overview summary answering your query with referencesCategory-wise results to explore all relevant documents on TaxTMI

2. Advanced
• Includes everything in Basic
Detailed report covering:
     -   Overview Summary
     -   Governing Provisions [Acts, Notifications, Circulars]
     -   Relevant Case Laws
     -   Tariff / Classification / HSN
     -   Expert views from TaxTMI
     -   Practical Guidance with immediate steps and dispute strategy

• Also highlights how each document is relevant to your query, helping you quickly understand key insights without reading the full text.Help Us Improve - by giving the rating with each AI Result:

Explore AI Search

Powered by Weblekha - Building Scalable Websites

×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

1983 (1) TMI 4

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... every year to every worker. The workmen in the assessee's distillery at Sheratelly were covered by the provisions of the Ordinance and, hence, the assessee was under a statutory obligation to pay gratuity to its workmen at the time of termination of their services. In the assessment year ended December 31, 1969, the assessee claimed to have made a provision towards gratuity amounting to Rs. 61,178 and charged it to profit and loss. In the relevant assessment year 1970-71, the assessee claimed this sum as an allowable deduction in the computation of its profits from Sheratelly distillery. The ITO disallowed the claim by reference to a quite inappropriate provision in the Act, namely, s. 36(1)(v), which related to the deduction of contribut....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....uction. " This decision of the AAC was objected to by the ITO in appeal before the Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal observed that Rs. 61,178 was calculated at the rate of 15 days' wages for every completed year of service of the employees. The Tribunal regarded this sum of Rs. 61,178 as " provision ". The Tribunal further observed that a provision for gratuity was chargeable against net profits and deductible as such in the computation of taxable income under the head " Business ". However, they did not disturb the order of the AAC remanding the matter to the ITO. In this reference, at the instance of the Department, we are asked to examine the correctness of the orders of the AAC and the Tribunal on the basis of the following question of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....which alone a provision for gratuity could be made, the ITO is under duty bound to arrive at an appropriate figure and then deduct the same. This is the purport of the AACs order of remand to the ITO. We are, however, satisfied that a provision for gratuity, strictly so called, must be made, not by the officer, but only by the assessee on the basis of an actuarial valuation. The assessee alone can charge the provision for gratuity, so arrived at, to his profit and loss account and then carry it to the balance-sheet as a provision under the head " Current liabilities and provisions ". If an assessee in a given case has not done so, but merely claims an ad hoe sum not based on any actuarial valuation and not actually debited by him to the pr....