1981 (4) TMI 161 - AT - Income Tax

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Deductibility of provision for gratuity under section 40A(7) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
2. Incremental liability versus full liability for gratuity provision.
3. Timing of deduction for gratuity provision.
4. Compliance with conditions for approved gratuity fund.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Deductibility of Provision for Gratuity:
The primary issue is whether the provision for gratuity amounting to Rs. 1,06,889 made by the assessee for the assessment year 1975-76 is deductible under section 40A(7) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The law, as amended by the Finance Act, 1975, with retrospective effect from 1-4-1973, generally disallows any provision for gratuity unless it falls within specific exceptions. The relevant exception under section 40A(7)(b)(ii) allows for such a provision if it is made in accordance with an actuarial valuation and certain other conditions are met, including the creation of an approved gratuity fund and contributions to it.

2. Incremental Liability versus Full Liability:
The Income Tax Officer (ITO) argued that only the incremental liability, i.e., the increase in gratuity liability during the current year, should be allowed as a deduction. The ITO's interpretation was that the full liability, taking into account the entire service period of employees, could only be allowed in the first year of statutory liability (assessment year 1974-75). However, the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Tribunal disagreed, stating that section 40A(7) does not distinguish between initial and incremental liability. The Tribunal held that the entire provision made in accordance with an actuarial valuation and fulfilling the conditions of section 40A(7)(b)(ii) is deductible.

3. Timing of Deduction for Gratuity Provision:
The Tribunal addressed whether the provision for gratuity, once made in accordance with the law, is deductible in the year it is made or only in the year of actual payment. It was concluded that the provision is deductible in the same year it is made, as supported by Explanation 2 to section 40A(7)(b), which indicates that the provision is deductible without waiting for actual payment.

4. Compliance with Conditions for Approved Gratuity Fund:
The assessee had constituted the gratuity fund on 24-7-1975 and applied for approval on the same day, with approval granted effective from 28-7-1975. The assessee also paid the full admissible amount of Rs. 1,06,889 into the fund on 9-9-1975, within the stipulated timeframe. The Tribunal confirmed that all conditions under section 40A(7)(b)(ii) were satisfied, including the actuarial valuation and the creation and contribution to an approved gratuity fund.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision, allowing the full provision of Rs. 1,06,889 as a deductible item for the assessment year 1975-76. The Tribunal clarified that section 40A(7) permits the deduction of such provisions if they meet the specified conditions, and there is no distinction between initial and incremental liability. The departmental appeal was dismissed, affirming that the provision made by the assessee was correctly deductible in the year it was made. The Tribunal also noted that the intervener's case, which involved different facts and issues, was not addressed in this judgment.