9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (11) TMI 673X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se, the Income Tax Tribunal is right in law in interpreting the word "any" occurring in Section 3 of the Expenditure Tax Act thereby making it unworkable, which is against the intention of the legislature ? 2. The assessee company is engaged in the business of running hotel. On verification of the records filed by the assessee, it was noticed by the Assessing Officer that the assessee's tariff rate exceeded the limit of Rs.1,200/-. The details of tariff, as furnished by the assessee through their letter dated 22.2.1999 to the Assessing Officer, are as follows:- Standard Single Rs.1000/- Standard Double Rs.1250/- Studio Single Rs.1150/- Studio Double Rs.1400/- Suite Rs.1600/- Special Suite Rs.2,050/- Consequently, the assessee was required to file a return of expenditure tax for the concerned assessment year. Upon filing the return, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment under Section 9 read with Section 11 of the Expenditure Tax Act, 1987 and thereby worked out the entire expenditures under the following heads for the purpose of levy of expenditure tax:- Assessment Year 1997-98 Room Rent Rs.2,53,21,912/- Food and Beverages Rs. 3,43,15,770/- Liquo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1999) 238 ITR 38 (H.P. Tourism Development Corporation Vs. Union of India and others). He further placed his reliance on the decision of the Apex Court reported in 1987 (2) SCC 707 (Shri Balaganesan Metals Vs. M.N.Shanmugham Chetty and others) in support of his contention that the word 'any' indicates the meaning 'all' or 'every' as well as 'some' or 'one' depending upon the context and the subject matter of the statute. Therefore, the learned counsel appearing for the Revenue contended that the assessee is liable under the Expenditure Tax Act as admittedly the assessee's tariff rate exceeded the limit of Rs.1,200/- as contemplated under Section 3 of the said Act. 7. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the asessee contended that the assessee is not liable under the Expenditure Tax Act as the word 'any' found in Section 3 should mean 'all' and not 'one' unit. The learned counsel for the assessee has once again relied on the decision of the Kerala High Court reported in 272 ITR 331 (Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Abad Hotels India (P) Ltd.) 8. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties and perused the orders of the authorities below. 9. The core issue in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (2) In relation to a restaurant referred to in clause (2) of section 3, means any expenditure incurred in, or payments made to, a restaurant in connection with the provision of food or drink by the restaurant, whether at the restaurant or outside, or by any other person in the restaurant, but does not include any expenditure referred to in sub-clauses (ii) and (iv) of clause (1). 10. Section 3 of the said Act contemplates the applicability of the Act in respect of a hotel where the room charges for any unit of residential accommodation at the time of incurring of such expenditure are one thousand two hundred rupees or more per day per individual. Therefore, what is to be seen is as to whether the expression occurring under Section 3 viz., "any unit of residential accommodation" is to be construed as "all the units of residential accommodation" of the hotel or "any one" of the same. In this connection, two contra views, one expressed by the Kerala High Court and the other expressed by the Himachal Pradesh High Court in the decisions reported in 272 ITR 331 (Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Abad Hotels India (P) Ltd.) and (1999) 238 ITR 38 (H.P. Tourism Development Corporation Vs. U ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dation or rooms in a hotel to be of the minimum room charges specified in section 3 of the Act as a condition precedent for the very applicability of the Act to the expenditure incurred by a customer in a hotel and the department's stand is that any unit shall be construed to mean even one out of many. 14. It is further observed therein that when the language used is possible of bearing more than one construction, the one which results in hardship, serious inconvenience, injustice and absurdity has to be rejected and construction which would avoid such results should always be preferred. Thus, the Himachal Pradesh High Court has found that the word 'any' is to have a diversity of meaning and employed to indicate "all" or "every" as well as "some" or "one" and its meaning in a given statute depends upon invariably the context of the subject matter of the statute. It is also pointed out by the Himachal Pradesh High Court that if the contention of the Revenue is to be taken that the word "any Unit" is to be construed as any one out of many, it will not only lead to absurdities but also result in unjust results opposed to the very object of the Act and in a sense even defeating the pu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inary and normal standard of services cannot and need not be allowed to be penalised with such a levy as the expenditure-tax, with its avowed purpose of curbing only lavish, affluent and ostentatious expenditure. The words "at the time of incurring of such expenditure", also has in our view, relevance and make it relatable to only the person in occupation of such rooms as stipulated in Section 3 of the Act. 25. ..... ...... ....... ....... ...... ....... ....... Therefore, in our view, the Act though should be applicable to all hotels wherein the room charges for any unit of residential accommodation, at the time of incurring of such expenditure, are four hundred rupees or more or one thousand two hundred rupees or more, per day per individual, as the case may be, for the relevant period under consideration, since the charge is levied upon and tax is payable by the customer who avails of any of the services enumerated in Section 5 of the Act, it is the expenditure incurred by such person who occupies and the expenditure incurred during such time for all or any of the services rendered and which are enumerated in Section 5 that alone would constitute chargeable expenditure and it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... yable by the customers who avail any of the services enumerated under Section 5 of the Act, it is such expenditure incurred by such person who occupies and the expenditure incurred during such time for all or any of the services rendered alone would constitute chargeable expenditure and the assessee becomes liable for the same under Expenditure Tax Act. Accordingly, the assessment order made by the Assessing Officer bringing the entire expenditure liable for expenditure tax is held as not correct. 18. As it is pointed out by the Assessing Officer that no break up details of chargeable expenditure were given by the assessee and consequently he proceeded to complete the assessment based on the data available on record, in fairness to the claim of both sides, we feel the proper course herein would be to set aside the order and remit the matter back to the Assessing Officer for the purpose of conducting an enquiry to find out the actual expenditure, which could be made liable to expenditure tax, as discussed supra. 19. In the result, we respectfully agree with the view expressed by the Division Bench of the Himachal Pradesh High Court reported in (1999) 238 ITR 38 (H.P. Tourism Devel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
