C.I.T. JALANDHER vs. ONKAR NATH AGGARWAL

ITR/64/1996HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01035038199622 December 2006Author: MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL,MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL3 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What were the facts?

This case involves an Income Tax Reference (ITR No. 64 of 1996) before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. The petitioner is the Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar, and the respondent is Shri Onkar Nath Aggarwal. The assessment year in question is 1985-86. The dispute arises from an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Amritsar Bench, dated May 20, 1993, in ITA No. 62(ASR)/1989. The Assessing Officer had disallowed expenses claimed by the assessee for commission and Export Market Development Allowance under Section 37(3A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) allowed the assessee's claim, and this decision was upheld by the ITAT.

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the Tribunal was justified in its decision. The Court referred to its own judgment in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Indo Asian Switchgears (P) Limited, (2002) 257 645, which distinguished between expenses on advertisement, publicity, and sales promotion, subject to Section 37(3A), and a discount allowed by an assessee to an agent for effecting sales. The Court noted that such a discount is not an expense in connection with publicity or advertisement but an amount forgone. The judgment stated that trade discount cannot be treated as wasteful expenditure and does not fall within the mischief of Section 37(3A). Applying this principle, the High Court found that both the commission and the Export Market Development Allowance were not covered by the disallowance specified under Section 37(3A) of the Act. The question of law was answered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee. The reference was disposed of accordingly.

What were the issues?

1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned ITAT is right in law in holding that expenses on account of commission amounting to Rs. 1,04,650/- are not to be taken into account for the purpose of disallowance under Section 37(3A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned ITAT is right in law in holding that Export Market Development Allowance amounting to Rs. 1,48,713/- is not to be taken into account for the purpose of disallowance under Section 37(3A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961? Assessee's Contentions: The assessee argued that the commission paid to dealers is not an expense in connection with advertisement, publicity, or sales promotion, but rather an amount forgone for effecting actual sales. It was likened to a trade discount, not wasteful expenditure. The assessee further contended that the Export Market Development Allowance stands on the same footing as commission. The assessee relied on the High Court's judgment in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Indo Asian Switchgears (P) Limited, (2002) 257 645. Revenue's Contentions: The revenue's counsel was unable to show any contrary opinion or rebut the submissions made on behalf of the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 37(3A)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ITR No.64 of 1996 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITR No.64 of 1996 Date of decision:22.12.2006 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar ....Petitioner versus Shri Onkar Nath Aggarwal ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Dr. N.L.Sharda, Advocate, for the revenue. Mr. Sanjay Bansal, Advocate, for the respondent.

JUDGMENT: Following question of law has been referred for the opinion of this Court by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar, arising out of its order dated 20.5.1993 in ITA No.62(ASR)/1989, for the assessment year 1985-86:- “Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. ITAT is right in law in holding that the expenses on account of commission amounting to Rs.1,04,650/- and Export Market Development Allowance amounting to Rs.1,48,713/- are not to be taken into account for the purpose of disallowance under sections 37(3A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961?”

The assessee claimed deduction towards commission and Export Market Development allowance. The Assessing Officer disallowed the same under secti

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 37(3A)

All 29 judgments and leading authorities on Section 37(3A) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →