TMI Blog1981 (8) TMI 125X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Act') in respect of the total amount assessed under the head 'Salaries'. 2. The assessee is an individual who was an employee of Rallis India Ltd. and retired on 1-11-1975. The assessee's income chargeable under the head 'Salaries' for the previous year ended 31-3-1976 was Rs. 30,892. This included a sum of Rs. 5,468 being gratuity received by the assessee in excess of the amount exempt under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e derived from the employment, the deduction under section 16(i) could not be allowed, as the assessee could not have incurred any expenditure to derive the amounts in question. We are unable to appreciate this contention which goes against the plain meaning of the section. According to section 16 the income chargeable under the head 'Salaries' shall be computed after making deduction in respect o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... plain that the standard deduction is to be allowed irrespective of whether any expenditure incidental to employment is actually incurred by the employee or not and further, that the deduction will be available in respect of the entire amount chargeable under the head 'Salaries' including the profits in lieu of or in addition to salary which admittedly covers the amounts in question by definition, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oyer or not and also that it will be calculated with reference to the entire amount chargeable to tax under the head 'Salaries'. We find that this position was again reiterated with reference to the assessment year under consideration, by Circular No. 161 dated 22-3-1975. Thus, the revenue itself has by public statements given the assessee to understand that that was the plain meaning of the secti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
