COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. KALANI P S
LAWS(MPH)-1986-2-35
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Decided on February 04,1986

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Appellant
VERSUS
P.S.KALANI Respondents


Cited Judgements :-

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. PANDEY B D [LAWS(ALL)-1998-2-42] [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. DEORA S C [LAWS(MPH)-1986-7-42] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

SOHANT, J. - (1.)BY this reference under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), the Tribunal, Indore Bench, has referred the following question of law to this Court for its opinion:
"Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee was entitled to separate deductions under s. 16 on salary received from the three employers during the account year although the deductions so allowed may thus exceed Rs. 3,500 ?"

(2.)THE material facts giving rise to this reference, briefly, are as follows : THE assessment year in question is 1979-80. THE assessee was during the relevant accounting year in the employment of three persons. From two employers, the assessee received salary of Rs. 6,000 and Rs. 24,750 respectively while from the third employer, the assessee received only perquisite consisting of furnished accommodation, the value of which was assessed at Rs. 12,000. THE assessee claimed separate standard deductions under s. 16 of the Act on the amounts of salary received by him from the three employers. THE ITO however, granted standard deduction limited to the extent of Rs. 3,500 only. An appeal preferred by the assessee before the AAC was dismissed but on further appeal before the Tribunal, the Tribunal held that the assessee was entitled to separate deductions under s. 16 of the Act and that the total amount thus admissible might exceed Rs. 3,500. Aggrieved by the order passed by the Tribunal, the Revenue sought a reference and it is at the instance of the Revenue that the aforesaid question of law has been referred to this Court for its opinion.
At the time of hearing, the learned counsel for the assessee fairly conceded that the matter is now concluded by the amendment to s. 16, of the Act inserting the following Explanation after the proviso to cl. (i):

"Explanation.--For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that where, in the case of an assessee, salary is due from, or paid or allowed by, more than one employer, the deduction under this clause shall be computed with reference to the aggregate salary due, paid orallowed to the assessee and shall in no case exceed the amount specified under this clause."

As this amendment has been brought into force retrospectively with effect from April 1, 1975, it was not disputed that it was applicable in the instant case. Under the circumstances, it must be held that the Tribunal was not justified in holding that the assessee was entitled to separate deductions under s. 16 of the Act on the amounts of salary received by him from the three employers during the accounting year in question. Our answer to the question referred to this Court is, therefore, in the negative and against the assessee.

(3.)REFERENCE answered accordingly.
In the circumstances of the case, parties shall bear their own costs of this reference.



Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.