1977 (11) TMI 71

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... C.S. Pvt. Ltd. It appears that being in receipt of a conveyance allowance from the former, he claimed a deduction of only Rs. 1,000 under s. 16(i) from the corresponding salary and he claimed a separate deduction of Rs. 3,500 from the salary received from the other Company. 3. The ITO was of the view that as the total amount of the salaries derived by the assessee exceeded Rs. 10,000, the assessee was not entitled to a deduction in a sum larger than Rs. 3,500. Therefore, he allowed a deduction of only Rs. 3,500 and did not allow a separate deduction for the balance of the claim for Rs. 1,000. 4. Having failed to convince the AAC that the assessee is entitled to a deduction under s. 16(i) in respect of the salary derived from each of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....g s. 16(i) as it stands from 1st April, 1975. 7. Now the relevant provisions of s. 16(i) are as below: "16. The income chargeable under the head 'Salaries' shall be computed after making the following deductions, namely: (i) in respect of expenditure incidental to the employment of the assessee, a sum calculated on the basis provided hereunder, namely: (a) where the salary derived from such employment does not exceed Rs. 10,000 20 % of such salary. (b) where the salary derived from such employment exceeds Rs. 10,000 Rs. 2,000 plus 10 % of the amount by which such salary exceeds Rs. 10,000 . or . Rs. 3,500 whichever is less." It is significant that in the opening language of s. 16, it is laid down that the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hen there is a separate source consisting of salary derived from yet another employment which in a given case may exceed Rs. 10,000.  This interpretation of s. 16 follows from a plain meaning of the words used therein. Therefore, there is no scope nor need to ascertain the intention of the legislature by taking aid from notes on the relevant Finance Bill amending the Act, the corresponding provisions of the section as they stood before the amendment etc.  Shri Rao did not offer any comment. 9. Shri D'Souza submitted that the word 'employment' used in s. 16(i) is a collective term embracing all the employments of the particular assessee in a given assessment year. In our opinion, this is a bare submission which is not supported ....