The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/s. Krishna Wines

PDF · subscribers
ITTA/479/2010HC TelanganaHBHC01009077201016 November 2010Bench: V.V.S.RAO,RAMESH RANGANATHAN2 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court allowed the appeals filed by the Revenue. The Court noted that the question of whether the assessee was entitled to claim deduction of salary and interest paid to partners was considered by a Division Bench of the same Court in The Commissioner of Income Tax v M/s.Swarna Bar & Restaurant. The Court found that the conclusion in that earlier judgment squarely covered the present cases. Following the precedent set in M/s.Swarna Bar & Restaurant, the High Court allowed the appeals, setting aside the impugned orders of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The operative direction was to allow the appeals filed by the Revenue and set aside the ITAT's orders. No costs were awarded. The judgment does not explicitly mention any issue left undecided.

What were the facts?

The assessees, M/s. Priya Wines and others, were granted licenses to conduct retail liquor businesses under the Andhra Pradesh Indian Liquor and Foreign Liquor Rules, 1970, and the Andhra Pradesh Excise Act, 1968. They commenced their businesses by forming partnership firms, either before or after obtaining the licenses. In their income tax returns for the relevant assessment years, the assessees claimed deductions for salary and interest paid to their partners. The Assessing Officer disallowed these deductions, relying on the Supreme Court's decision in Biharilal Jaiswal v Commissioner of Income Tax. The assessees appealed to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) and were successful. The Revenue (Commissioner of Income Tax, Vijayawada) has filed these appeals under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, challenging the ITAT's orders.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the assessees were entitled to claim deduction for salary paid to partners in their income tax returns, in light of Section 40(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Revenue contended that the disallowance of salary paid to partners was justified, likely referencing the Supreme Court's decision in Biharilal Jaiswal v Commissioner of Income Tax, which held that salary paid to partners is not deductible. The assessees argued for the allowability of such deductions. 2. Whether the assessees were entitled to claim deduction for interest paid to partners in their income tax returns, in light of Section 40(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Revenue's position was likely aligned with the disallowance of interest paid to partners. The assessees contended for the deductibility of interest paid to partners. The judgment notes that the conclusion in The Commissioner of Income Tax v M/s.Swarna Bar & Restaurant squarely covers the lis in these cases.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A,Section 40(b)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN

I.T.T.A.Nos.191. 192, 208, 215, 217, 231, 234, 300, 303, 372, 443, 462, 471, 479 and 496 of 2010

November 16, 2010

Between: The Commissioner of Income Tax, Vijayawada … Appellants

And

M/s.Priya Wines, Khammam And others ... Respondents

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO AND

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN I.T.T.A.Nos.191. 192, 208, 215, 217, 231, 234, 300, 303, 372, 443, 462, 471, 479 and 496 of 2010

COMMON JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice V.V.S.Rao)

In all these cases the assessees were granted a licence under Andhra Pradesh Indian Liquor and Foreign Liquor Rules, 1970 and Andhra Pradesh Excise Act, 1968. The licence enabled the assessee to carry on trade in retail liquor business. The assessees commenced their respective business by forming a partnership firm with others. Such firm was constituted either before or after obtaining the licence.

In the income tax returns, for the relevant year, the assessees claimed deduction in respect of the salary and interest paid to the partners. The assessing officer, following the judgment of the Supreme Court in Biharilal Jaiswal v Commissioner of Income Tax[1], disallowed the deduction. The assessees were, however, successful before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Revenue has now come forward with these appeals under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Though the notices are served on the respondents, none appears and nobody entered appearance for them. The question whether the assessee was entitled to claim deduction of salary and interest paid to partners in the returns was considered by a Division Bench of this Court in The Commissioner of Income Tax v M/s.Swarna Bar & Restaurant[2]. There is no dispute that the conclusion therein squarely covers the lis in these cases. Following the same, the appeals have to be allowed. Accordingly the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed, and the impugned orders of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal are set aside. No costs.

________________ (V.V.S. RAO, J)

_______________________________ (RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J) November 16, 2010 YS [1] (1996) 217 ITR 746 [2] ITTA Nos.613 of 2006 and batch, dated 09.9.2010

More judgments on Section 40(b)

All 428 judgments and leading authorities on Section 40(b) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →