TMI Blog2014 (10) TMI 575X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... her Group Companies for the benefit of workers is to be treated as Donation and it should not be treated as Revenue – Tribunal took a different view and held in favour of the Assessee - – assessee agreed that in the SLP before the SC the claim of the revenue is accepted, therefor the case of the revenue is accepted – Decided in favour of revenue. - C.M.A. No. 976 of 2004 - - - Dated:- 18-8-2014 - R. Sudhakar And G. M. Akbar Ali,JJ. For the Appellant : Mr. M. Swaminathan For the Respondent :Mr. J. Balachander Mrs. Indumathi JUDGMENT (Delivered by R. Sudhakar,J.,) The present Appeal is filed against the Order dated 30.03.2004 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai,in ITA No.1024/Mds/97. 2. At the time of ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the amounts paid to the Rajapalayam Mills Ltd., Employees Welfare Assocation for the construction of Kalyanamandapam as revenue expenditure? 5. The Assessment Year relates to 1994-1995. The respondent/assessee in this case paid an amount of ₹ 6,00,000/-(Rupees six lakhs) to the workers on the occasion of Founder's day Centenary Celebration and that was treated as revenue expenditure. The Assessing Officer was of the view that the amount paid by the assessee for the construction of Kalyanamandapam along with other Group Companies for the benefit of workers is to be treated as Donation and it should not be treated as Revenue. Aggrieved against the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s I vs T.V. Sundaram Iyengar and Sons (P) Ltd reported in (1974) 94 ITR 428, the assessee's claim cannot be allowed for deduction therein under any provisions of the Act. In the decision reported in (1990) 186 ITR 276 in the case of Commissioner of Incomoe Tax, Madras vs T.V. Sundaram Iyengar and Sons (P) Ltd., this Court pointed out that the expenditure was incurred more as a matter of commercial expediency in pursuance of the tripartite agreement between the employer and the employee. This Court further pointed out that the agreement of the employer to contribute towards construction of the houses was the result of the business expediency qualifying for deduction as a revenue expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
