MTT. AR. S. AR. ARUNACHALAM CHETTIAR vs COMMISSIONER OF Income Tax, MADRAS.

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by the Honble the Chief Justice.)

The decision of this Court in Annamalai Chettiar v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Madras, answer the first question, and the answer is that the

assessment should be made u/s 9 of the Income Tax Act.

The decision of this Court in Ramaswamy Ayyangar v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Madras, has bearing on the second question. In that case it

was held that the expenses of obtaining probate and letters of administration were not deductible. In the present case the assessee wishes to

deduct the cost of defending a suit filed by the Government of the Federate Malay States to recover from him death duty on his fathers estate. The

assessee successfully resisted the suit. He says that if he had not resisted it, the Government would have been able to seize the assets of his

business in execution of the decree. This may have been the position, but it has no bearing on the question now was sued as a person representing

his fathers estate, and the moneys which he expended in this litigation were not expended wholly or exclusively for the purpose of his business. The

expenditure was quite outside the business.

The answer to the question is that the sum of $ 1,136 is not an expenditure allowable in computing the foreign business income.

The assessee will pay the Commissioners costs, Rs. 250.

Reference answered accordingly.