9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Deduction under Section 16(i) in respect of pension. 2. Deduction under Section 80L in respect of the income of the wife added under Section 64 of the Act. Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Deduction under Section 16(i) in respect of pension: The assessee, an individual who had retired from M/s. Jerdin Henderson, was in receipt of a pension amounting to Rs. 11,000 and salary from Assam Tea Corpn. Ltd. and M/s. Radak Tea Syndicate Ltd. totaling Rs. 16,250 for the assessment year 1976-77. The Income Tax Officer (ITO) allowed a standard deduction only from the salary amount. The assessee claimed that the pension should also be included for computing the deduction under Section 16(i), arguing that pension falls within the definition of salary. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner (AAC) rejected this claim, stating that pension does not involve current employment or incidental expenditure, thus justifying the ITO's decision. Upon further appeal, the Tribunal opined that the assessee's claim was correct. Section 16 provides for a standard deduction from income chargeable under the head "salaries," and Section 17 includes pensions within the definition of salary. The Tribunal found no basis for distinguishing between salary from current employment and pension from past employment, especially after the Finance Act, 1974, which simplified the assessment procedure by removing the requirement for proof of actual expenditure. The Tribunal emphasized that the standard deduction applies to all salary income, including pensions, to simplify assessments and avoid unnecessary inquiries. Thus, the Tribunal allowed the deduction for the pension amount under Section 16(i). 2. Deduction under Section 80L in respect of the income of the wife added under Section 64 of the Act: The second issue involved the inclusion of the wife's income in the assessee's total income under Section 64. The wife had deposited cash transferred by the assessee in a bank, earning interest of Rs. 5,100, while the assessee himself had interest income of Rs. 25,726. The assessee claimed deductions of Rs. 3,000 each under Section 80L for both his and his wife's interest income. The ITO allowed the deduction only once, arguing that the interest income of the wife, added under Section 64, did not qualify for a separate deduction under Section 80L. The AAC upheld this view, stating that only the assessee, not the spouse, could qualify for the deduction under Section 80L. On further appeal, the Tribunal disagreed with the authorities below. It noted that Section 64(1)(iii) includes the spouse's income from assets transferred without adequate consideration in the total income of the individual for tax purposes. However, this does not deem the spouse's income as the individual's income. Section 80L allows a deduction for interest income included in the gross total income, and since the spouse's interest income is added under Section 64, it should qualify for the deduction. The Tribunal highlighted that Section 64 does not transform the spouse's income into the individual's income but merely adds it for tax computation. The intention of Section 80L is to exempt the income, not the person. The Tribunal also pointed out that the legislative history and policy behind Section 80L support the view that the exemption applies to the income itself, regardless of its source. Therefore, the Tribunal concluded that the interest income of the wife added under Section 64 should be computed after allowing the deduction under Section 80L, thus entitling the assessee to the additional deduction of Rs. 3,000. Conclusion: The appeal was allowed, with the Tribunal directing the ITO to recompute the total income, granting the deductions claimed by the assessee under Sections 16(i) and 80L.
|
