SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

1987 Supreme(AP) 220

Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : B.P.JEEVAN REDDY, Y.V.ANJANEYULU
Commissioner of Income Tax - Appellant
Versus
C.S.Murthy - Respondent
Decided On : 03-28-87

The relief under section 91 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is available only for doubly taxed income, which is the foreign income that is taxed under the Indian law.

Headnote:

INCOME TAX - SECTION 91 - RELIEF FOR FOREIGN TAX PAID - DOUBLY TAXED INCOME - INTERPRETATION - SCOPE AND APPLICABILITY - FOREIGN INCOME EXEMPTED FROM TAX UNDER SECTION 80RRA - NOT DOUBLY TAXED INCOME - NO RELIEF UNDER SECTION 91.

Fact of the Case:

The assessee, an employee of Osmania Dental College, Hyderabad, was deputed to Iran. He received salary income in Iran, which was subject to tax in Iran. The assessee claimed relief under section 91 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the tax paid in Iran. The Income-tax Officer allowed relief only on the portion of the salary income that was not exempted from tax under section 80rra of the Act. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Tribunal allowed relief on the entire salary income.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the assessee was entitled to relief under section 91 of the Act only on the portion of the salary income that was subjected to tax in India. The court held that the portion of the salary income that was exempted from tax under section 80rra was not doubly taxed income and, therefore, not eligible for relief under section 91.

Issues: Whether the assessee was entitled to relief under section 91 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the entire tax paid in Iran.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the expression "such doubly taxed income" in section 91 of the Act refers to the foreign income that is taxed under the Indian law. The court held that the criteria for determining doubly taxed income is whether the income is subjected to tax under the Income-tax Act. The court held that the portion of the salary income that was exempted from tax under section 80rra was not subjected to tax under the Income-tax Act and, therefore, not doubly taxed income.

Final Decision: The court answered the question referred to it in the negative, holding that the assessee was not entitled to relief under section 91 of the Act for the entire tax paid in Iran.

Y. V. ANJANEYULU, J.

( 1 ) THIS reference arising under section 256 (1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short "the Act"), made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (for short "the Tribunal"), at the instance of the commissioner of Income-tax raises a short but interesting question. The matter relates to the income-tax assessment year 1976-77 and the question referred for the consideration of this court is :"whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee is entitled to relief under section 91 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, of the entire tax deducted at source by the Government of Ira ?"we shall notice the relevant facts.

( 2 ) THE assessee was employed as a dental surgeon in the Osmania Dental College, Hyderabad. He went on deputation to Iran. In the previous year relevant to the income-tax assessment year 1976-77, the assessee received salary of Rs. 64,470 from the Government of Iran wherefrom tax of Rs. 5,974 was deducted under the law in force in that country. The residential status of the assessee for the assessment year 1976-77 is "resident and ordinarily resident", as indicated in the assessment order dated 26/03/1980. Under section 5 of the Act, the total income of any previous year of a person who is resident in India includes, inter alia, all income accruing or arising to him outside India during such year (section 5 (1) (c) of the Act ). Consequently, the salary income accruing or arising to the assessee outside India in Iran was liable to be included in the total income of the assessee for the purpose of assessment to income-tax in India. There is no dispute that the aforesaid salary income accruing or arising to the assessee in Iran fell to be included in the assessees total income for the income-tax assessment year 1976-77.

( 3 ) BEFORE the Income-tax Officer making the assessment, the assessee put forward two claims. The first claim was that he was entitled to deduction in respect of remuneration received from the foreign employer in terms of section 80rra of the Act. The second claim was that in determining the tax payable on the foreign income, appropriate relief on the income doubly taxed should be allowed under section 91 of the Act.

( 4 ) AS far as the first claim is concerned, it may be pointed out that section 80rra provided for deduction equal to 50% of the remuneration received from the foreign employer subject to the requirements specified therein being satisfied. On scrutiny, the Income-tax Officer was satisfied that the requirements relating to the eligibility for deduction under section 80rra were satisfied. Accordingly, the officer allowed, by way of deduction, Rs. 32,235 which is equal to 50% of the remuneration of Rs. 64,470 received from the foreign employer.

( 5 ) A dispute arose in the determination of the assessees second claim. According to the assessee, the income doubly taxed under the Indian laws is Rs. 64,470 which was the remuneration paid by the foreign employer and, consequently, he is entitled to appropriate tax relief under section 91 of the Act in respect of that doubly taxed income. On the other hand, the Income-tax Officers claim was that although the assessee received remuneration of Rs. 64,470 from the foreign employer, the amount that was doubly taxed under the Act in India is only one-half as the balance one-half was allowed under section 80rra of the Act. The officer accordingly restricted the relief under section 91 of the Act to only Rs. 32,235.

( 6 ) THE tax at the rate applicable to Iran on the sum of Rs. 32,235 was ascertained as Rs. 2,986 and as that tax was less than the Indian rate of tax, the said amount of Rs. 2,986 was allowed as a deduction from out of the tax payable by the assessee.

( 7 ) AGGRIEVED by the order of the Income-tax Officer, the assessee filed an appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner accepted the assessees claim and directed allowance of the entire tax paid in I












Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top