1975 (9) TMI 199 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

1. ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDERED

The core legal questions considered by the Court were:

(a) Whether the expenditure of Rs. 38,832/- incurred by the assessee for the benefit of other candidates in an election qualifies for exclusion from taxable expenditure under Section 5(a) or Section 5(j) of the Expenditure Tax Act, 1958;

(b) Whether the sum of Rs. 47,367/- given as party expenses to the office bearers of the Socialist Party can be excluded from the taxable expenditure under Section 5(a) or Section 5(j) of the Act;

(c) Whether politics constitutes a profession or occupation for the purpose of Section 5(a) exclusion;

(d) Whether the payments made to other candidates and to the political party constitute "donations" or "gifts" as contemplated under Section 5(j) of the Act, thereby exempting such expenditures from taxation.

2. ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS

Issue (c): Is politics a profession or occupation under Section 5(a)?

The Court began by examining whether politics qualifies as a profession or occupation within the meaning of Section 5(a). The relevant provision excludes from taxable expenditure any expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of a business, profession, vocation or occupation carried on by the assessee.

The Court acknowledged the multifaceted nature of politics, referencing authoritative views and literary opinions. It noted that politics has been regarded as a science, an art, a religion, and a profession by various thinkers and leaders. The Court emphasized that under modern conditions in India, politics is indeed a profession or occupation, especially when pursued with abiding and ambitious interest, as was the case with the assessee who was the Chairman of the State Socialist Party.

Therefore, the Court held that politics qualifies as a profession or occupation for the purposes of Section 5(a).

Issue (a): Whether expenditure for the benefit of other candidates is excluded under Section 5(a) or Section 5(j)?

The Court then considered whether the Rs. 38,832/- spent by the assessee to promote other candidates' election prospects can be regarded as expenditure wholly and exclusively incurred for his profession or occupation, thus qualifying for exclusion under Section 5(a).

The Court expressed serious doubts whether meeting the election expenses of other candidates could be considered professional expenditure. Instead, it analyzed whether such payments constituted donations under Section 5(j), which excludes from taxable expenditure any expenditure incurred by way of gift, donation, settlement, or trust for the benefit of any other person.

The Court defined donation as a voluntary transfer of title and possession without consideration. It found no evidence or suggestion that the assessee expected any material return from these payments. The payments were gratuitous contributions to other candidates of his party to boost their electoral prospects.

Accordingly, the Court concluded that these payments were donations within the meaning of Section 5(j), thereby exempting them from expenditure tax.

Issue (b): Whether sums given to the political party are excluded under Section 5(a) or Section 5(j)?

The Court next examined the Rs. 47,367/- given to the Socialist Party through its office bearers. It assumed these payments were made without expectation of material return, constituting outright gifts or donations.

The Court acknowledged the common practice of wealthy individuals making donations to political parties motivated by various factors such as goodwill, prestige, or ideological affinity. It emphasized that the presence of any material return would negate the characterization of such payments as gifts or donations.

On the facts and circumstances, the Court found the payments to be pure donations under Section 5(j), not taxable expenditure.

Cross-issue considerations:

The Court rejected the initial submission by the State that the Act intended to tax such political expenditures, recognizing that the Act's spirit and letter do not intend to penalize political profession or philanthropic donations.

The Court also noted that the High Court's reversal of the assessing authority's and Tribunal's findings was sound, as both categories of expenditure fell outside the taxable ambit under Section 5(j).

3. SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGS

The Court established the following core principles and final determinations:

"A fair reading of the provisions in question convincingly excludes from 'taxable expenditure' sums wholly and exclusively incurred for the purpose of a profession or occupation carried on by the assessee and no modern man may dispute that politics is a profession or occupation."

"When this Raja assessee gave money to the candidates of his party for them to meet their election expenses, he made donations. Even if he met their election expenditure it was money gratuitously given on their behalf and therefore amounted to donation."

"The inevitable conclusion from our discussion is that both the heads of expenditure fall under Section 5(j) of the Act, and, therefore, flow out of the assessable zone."

The Court conclusively held that:

(i) Politics is a profession or occupation within the meaning of Section 5(a) of the Expenditure Tax Act;

(ii) Expenditure incurred by the assessee for the benefit of other candidates, lacking any material return, constitutes donations under Section 5(j) and is exempt from expenditure tax;

(iii) Contributions made to the political party similarly qualify as gifts or donations under Section 5(j) and are excluded from taxable expenditure;

(iv) The High Court's decision to exclude these expenditures from the taxable base was correct and the appeal against it was dismissed.