One company purchased Land from Farmers for the Business. They have given jobs to Farmers on Selection/Skill basis. The Other farmers whet to Arbitrator for providing job or compension on not providing job. Now the company paying the compension to farmers who are not willing to do job.
How to account the lump sum compension paid. What will be the treatment in income tax.
The point to be noted here is that whether this cost can qualify as a directly attributable cost of bringing the asset to working condition for its intended use. Then this can be capitalised in the books. If not, then this has to be expensed off as administrative costs or general overhead.
Now I guess this is difficult to establish a nexus between the cost incurred for compensation and the usability of the land for the business purpose.
So may be we have to end up in booking this as an expense.
There should be divergent views on this. Other Experts' opinion are highly solicited here.
20 July 2024
The situation you described involves the payment of compensation to farmers who were promised jobs but are now receiving compensation instead. Here’s how this scenario could be treated from an accounting and income tax perspective:
### Accounting Treatment:
1. **Recognition of Liability:** - The company should recognize a liability in its books as soon as the obligation to pay compensation arises, typically when the arbitrator or the legal process determines that the farmers are entitled to compensation.
2. **Expense Recognition:** - The lump sum compensation paid should be treated as an expense in the company's income statement for the period in which it is paid or becomes payable. This ensures that the expenses are matched with the revenues or benefits derived from the transaction.
3. **Disclosure:** - Proper disclosure of the nature and amount of compensation paid should be made in the company's financial statements. This ensures transparency and compliance with accounting standards.
### Income Tax Treatment:
1. **Deductibility:** - The compensation paid may be allowable as a deduction under the Income Tax Act if it is incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the business. The key consideration is whether the payment is revenue expenditure or capital expenditure. - Generally, revenue expenditure (like compensation for services not rendered) is deductible against taxable income in the year it is incurred.
2. **Case Laws:** - There are several case laws where the deductibility of similar expenditures has been discussed. For instance, in the case of **CIT vs. Raja Benoy Kumar Sahas Roy** (1957), the Supreme Court held that payments made to acquire a right to carry on business activities were revenue expenditures. This principle could potentially apply to payments made for compensation in lieu of services. - It's advisable to consult professional tax advisors or refer to tax case law databases for specific precedents related to similar compensation scenarios.
### Practical Steps:
- **Consultation:** Given the complexity of the issue, consulting with a qualified tax advisor or chartered accountant is recommended. They can provide guidance on the specific tax treatment based on the nature of the compensation and relevant tax laws.
- **Documentation:** Maintain thorough documentation of the arbitration process, agreements with farmers, payment details, and any correspondence related to the compensation. This documentation will be crucial for substantiating the deduction claimed under income tax laws.
- **Compliance:** Ensure compliance with all statutory requirements related to income tax deduction claims and financial reporting.
In conclusion, while the lump sum compensation paid to farmers will likely be treated as an expense in the company's financial statements, its income tax treatment will depend on factors such as its nature and purpose, and the applicability of relevant tax laws. Seeking professional advice will help ensure proper accounting treatment and compliance with income tax requirements.
CAclubindia
