TMI Blog1992 (12) TMI 25X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be stated in short. The assessee was a director of Tata Iron and Steel Company, Jamshedpur. He was appointed for a period of three years. According to the terms of the agreement, the assessee was to get a salary of Rs. 7,500 per month and a commission at the rate of 1% on the net profits earned by the company subject to a ceiling of Rs. 45,000 per annum or half of the fixed salary whichever was less. Later on, the terms of appointment of the assessee were varied and the company, instead of paying commission, decided to purchase deferred annuity policies worth Rs. 45,000 from the Life Insurance Corporation of India, vide a resolution passed at the annual general meeting of the company held on August 22, 1972, which runs as under : " Resolv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the terms of the said policy, the annuity was payable either to the assessee on his retirement or to his dependants on his death. During the course of assessment proceeding for the assessment year in question, the assessee claimed that the amount of Rs. 45,000 paid by the company against the deferred annuity policies, purchased pursuant to the aforesaid resolution, is not taxable in the hands of the assessee. The Income-tax Officer rejected the claim, which was upheld by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. But, on second appeal, the Tribunal took the view that the amount in question was not taxable in the hands of the assessee in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. L. W. Russel reported in [1964] 53 ITR 91. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly covered by our opinion rendered in the case of CIT v. J. G. Keshwani [1993] 202 ITR 391 (Taxation Cases Nos. 56 to 59 of 1980 decided on October 29, 1992 ). In the said judgment, we have examined in detail the corresponding provisions as appearing under the 1922 Act and the 1961 Act. In my opinion, the said judgment is conclusive so far as this court is concerned for the question involved. In the above view of the matter, the question referred to this court is answered in the negative, i.e., against the assessee. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Let a copy of this judgment be transmitted to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna, in terms of section 260 of the Act. AFTAB ALAM J. - I agree. - - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
