COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. R JAYALAKSHMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE proviso to Section 64(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, has been invoked by the assessee. While the Revenue contends that the assessee is not entitled to the benefit of that proviso. THE Tribunal has found that the assessee along with a partner is in the business of running a printing press wherein the husband of the assessee one Ramalingam was employed as manager on a salary of Rs. 8,400 for the assessment year 1982-83 and which was Rs. 17,200 for the year 1983-84 ; that the business was carried on initially as a proprietary concern of the assessee wherein her husband had been working as manager by receiving a salary and before his employment in the said business, he had been working from the year 1965 in a similar business elsewhere, on salary. Ramalingam thus had a long experience in this line of business first under others, later as a manager of his wife's business and still later as the manager of the business run by the firm in which his wife, along with another handicapped person, was a partner.

(2.) THE Income-tax Officer sought to include the salary paid to the said Ramalingam in the computation of income of the assessee on the ground that, that amount had been paid to the spouse of a partner, relying upon Section 64(1) of the Act. On appeal, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner deleted the said, amount and the Tribunal has confirmed the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. Learned counsel for the Revenue contended as had been contended before the Tribunal, that the said Ramalingam does not possess a degree or diploma in printing or management and, therefore, notwithstanding his undisputed long experience in the field and also the undisputed fact that the business in which he worked was owned by a firm constituted of a lady and a handicapped person as partners, the salary paid to him is necessarily to be included in the income of his wife. We are unable to agree with that submission.

(3.) REGARD must, therefore, be had to the nature of the business carried on by the concern, the nature of the technical or professional knowledge and experience usable in that concern and the kind of technical or professional qualifications, knowledge and experience possessed by the spouse to whom the payment is made from that concern for the services rendered by that person.