CIT v. V.O. Chidambaranar Port Trust (2019) 266 Taxman 141 / 311 CTR 227(Mad) (HC)

S. 37(1):Business expenditure -Contribution to recognized provident fund -Payment of pension to retired employees which had been duly approved and notified by Central Government under ‘Tuticorin’ Port Trust Employees Regulations, 1979, said payment being in terms pf statutory regulation, would fall within general deductions under S. 37(i) and, same could not be brought under S. 36(1)(iv) and (v) of the Act .[ S 36(1)(iv) 36(1) (v) ]

During relevant year, assessee claimed deductions of amount contributed to recognised pension and gratuity fund under section 36(1)(iv) and 36(1)(v) respectively . Apart from that, assessee also claimed deduction under S. 37(1) towards actual pension payments made to employees in assessment year in question . AO held that when deduction was allowed towards contribution to recognised superannuation funds, deduction claimed in respect of actual payment is not allowable  . CIT (A) held that assessee had actually made monthly pension payments to its retired employees to fulfil statutory obligation and therefore, same could not be denied deduction. Tribunal confirmed order passed by CIT (A) . Court held that  the payment of pension to retired employees had been duly approved and notified by Central Government under ‘Tuticorin’ Port Trust Employees Regulations, 1979 . On facts, nature of deduction claimed by assessee in respect of payments made in terms of said statutory regulation would fall within general deductions under S. 37(1) of the Act  and same could not be brought under purview of S. 36(1)(iv)  and 36(1)(v) of the Act .  ( AY. 2009-10 , 2010 -11)