S.JASBIR SINGH, vs. CIT AMRITSAR
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court of Punjab and Haryana answered the referred question of law in favour of the revenue and against the assessee. The Court found that the issue was covered by its previous judgments. Specifically, the Court referred to its decision in B.M. Parmar v. C.I.T. (1999) 235 ITR 679 and a more recent judgment dated 5.9.2006 in I.T.R. No.15 of 1995 (The Commissioner of Income Tax, Haryana, Rohtak v. Kamal Kishore Batra DO, LIC, Kalanaur, Rohtak). In both these precedents, the Court had held that incentive bonus is part of salary and no deduction is permissible from it. Therefore, the Tribunal's finding that incentive bonus is part of salary and no deduction is permissible was upheld. The ratio decidendi is that incentive bonus, by its nature, forms part of the total salary income and is not eligible for any specific deductions unless provided for by law. The operative direction is to answer the question in favour of the revenue.
What were the facts?
This case involves an Income Tax Reference (ITR) filed by S. Jasbir Singh Gill, a Development Officer from Amritsar, against the Commissioner of Income Tax, Amritsar. The reference arises from an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Amritsar Bench, on March 1, 1996, concerning the assessment year 1991-92. The core dispute revolves around the taxability of incentive bonus received by the assessee. The ITAT's order, which is under challenge, held that the incentive bonus formed part of the salary and no deduction was permissible from it. The High Court of Punjab and Haryana is tasked with answering a specific question of law referred by the ITAT.
What were the issues?
1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that incentive bonus was a part of salary and no deduction out of incentive bonus was permissible? Assessee's contention: The assessee, through Ms. Rimpi Chaudhary, Advocate, is implicitly challenging the ITAT's finding that incentive bonus is part of salary and not eligible for any deduction. The specific arguments made by the assessee before the High Court are not detailed in the judgment. Revenue's contention: The revenue, represented by Dr. N.L. Sharda, Advocate, supports the ITAT's decision. The revenue relies on the judgment of this Court in B.M. Parmar v. C.I.T. (1999) 235 ITR 679 and their recent judgment dated 5.9.2006 in I.T.R. No.15 of 1995 (The Commissioner of Income Tax, Haryana, Rohtak v. Kamal Kishore Batra DO, LIC, Kalanaur, Rohtak) to argue that incentive bonus is indeed part of salary and no deduction is permissible.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. I.T.R. No.23 of 1998 Date of decision: 31.10.2006 S. Jasbir Singh Gill, Development Officer, Amritsar. -----Applicant Vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Amritsar. -----Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Ms. Rimpi Chaudhary, Advocate for the assessee. Dr. N.L. Sharda, Advocate for the revenue. ----- ORDER: Following question of law has been referred for opinion of this Court by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar, arising out of its order dated 01.03.1996 in I.T.A. No.168(ASR)/1995) in respect of assessment year 1991-92:- “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that incentive bonus was a part of salary and no deduction out of incentive bonus was permissible?” We find that the issue stands covered in favour of the revenue and against the assessee by the judgment of this Court in B.M. Parmar v. C.I.T. (1999) 235 ITR 679. In our recent judgment dated 5.9.2006 in I.T.R. No.15 of 1995 (The Commissioner of Income Tax, Haryana, Rohtak v. Kamal Kishore Batra DO, LIC, Kalanaur, Rohtak), we have answered the question in favour of the revenue and against the assessee. Accordingly, the question referred is answered in favour of the revenue and against the assessee. ( ADARSH KUMAR GOEL ) JUDGE October 31, 2006 ( RAJESH BINDAL ) ashwani JUDGE
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Kniit Net Industries Private Limited, Khurda vs. Superintendent Of CGST And Central Excise, Bhubaneswar Ii CircleOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Swarnapai Chemicals (Opc) Private Limited, Cuttack vs. Sales Tax Officer, Cuttack IOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S. Middlex, Puri vs. Commnr. Of State Tax, Banijyakar Bhawan, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Sunadei Indane Gramin Vitrak, Nayagarh vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, Cuttack, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Sunanda Raul vs. The Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes And Goods Nad Services Tax, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
