Salaryl Received From United Nations
This query is : Resolved
18 February 2008
what is the tax implications on the Salary received from United Nations? I have seen Circular No.293 dt10.02.1981, in that it say the pension is exempt from Tax.
19 February 2008
Pension paid by United Nations Organisations is exempt - Pension amount received by U.N. Pensioners is exempt from tax, since such pension is nothing but salary - CIT v. K. Ramaiah [1980] 126 ITR 638 (Kar.).
19 February 2008
1980] 126 ITR 638 (KAR.)
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Commissioner of Income-tax
v.
K. Ramaiah
M.K. SRINIVASA IYENGAR AND M. RAMA JOIS, JJ.
IT REFERRED CASE NOS. 93 OF 1977 AND 122 OF 1978
AUGUST 20, 1980
JUDGMENT
Rama Jois, J.—The ITAT, Bangalore Bench, Bangalore, has referred the following common question for the opinion of this court:
"Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that pension received from the United Nations was exempt from taxation?"
In ITR C. No. 93 of 1977, the assessment year is 1972-73. The assessee was an erstwhile employee of the United Nations Organisation (hereinafter referred to as "the U.N.O."). During the previous year relevant to the assessment year, he received a sum of Rs. 12,780 as pension from the U.N.O. Before the ITO, the assessee claimed that the aforesaid amount received from the U.N.O. was exempt from taxation in view of the United Nations (Privileges and Immunities) Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as "the 1947 Act"). The ITO did not agree with the claim made by the assessee. He was of the view that the claim for exemption from taxation was not available in respect of pension. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the AAC. The appellate authority accepted the contention urged for the assessee. The ITO questioned the correctness of the appellate order before the Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal affirmed the order of the appellate authority. Thereafter, at the instance of the Commissioner, the question mentioned earlier has been referred for the opinion of this court.
In ITR C. No. 122 of 1978, the assessment year concerned is 1975-76. During the previous year relevant to the said assessment year, the assessee was in receipt of pension of Rs. 51,322 from the United Nations. In the said case also, claim for exemption made by the assessee before the ITO on a similar ground was rejected. But the same was accepted by the appellate authority and confirmed by the Tribunal. Thereafter, similar question has been referred for the opinion of this court at the instance of the Commissioner.
In our opinion, on a combined reading of the provisions of the 1947 Act and section 17 of the I.T. Act, 1961, the conclusion reached by the appellate authority and the Appellate Tribunal are correct. The 1947 Act was enacted which received the assent of the Governor-General on the 20th December, 1947. The preamble and section 2 of the said Act read as follows :
"Whereas it is expedient to give effect to the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations, and to enable similar privileges and immunities to be enjoyed by other international organisations and their representatives and officials ;
It is hereby enacted as follows :- . . .
2. Conferment on United Nations and its representatives and officers of certain privileges and immunities.-(1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any other law, the provisions set out in the Schedule to this Act of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities, adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on the 13th day of February, 1946, shall have the force of law in India.
(2) The Central Government may, from time to time, by notification in the Official Gazette, amend the Schedule in conformity with any amendments, duly made and adopted, of the provisions of the said Convention set out therein."
As can be seen from the preamble, the Act was enacted for giving effect to the conventions regarding the privileges and immunities of the United Nations and to enable the representatives and officials of the U.N.O. to enjoy those privileges and immunities. Section 2 of the 1947 Act makes the provisions incorporated in the Schedule to the Act as law in India. Section 18, section (b) of art. V of the Schedule, is the provision which is relevant to the facts of this case :
============================================================================
"ARTICLE V
Officials
Section 18 : Officials of the United Nations shall : . . .
(b) be exempt from taxation on the salaries and emoluments paid to them by the United Nations ;- . . . "
==================================================================================
The ITO, in both these cases, took the view that the effect of clause(b) of section 18 of art. V referred to above, was only to exempt the salaries and emoluments paid to the officials by the U.N.O., and this obviously meant when they were in service and, therefore, the said immunities did not extend to pensionary benefits. The ITO failed to notice that under section 17 of the I.T. Act, 1961, "salary" is defined as including any annuity or pension [vide clause (ii) of sub-section (1) of section 17]. As rightly pointed out by the AAC, the amount of pension received is chargeable to tax under the head "Salary" and, consequently, the meaning of the expression "Salary" given in section 17 of the I.T. Act, 1961, automatically applies to any amount of pension received by a person which is chargeable to tax under the head "Salary" Therefore, it follows that any amount of pension received by the assessee from the U.N.O. falls within the description of the word "salary" used in sections 14 and 17 of the I.T. Act, 1961, and, consequently, the immunity granted under section 18 of art. V of the Schedule to the 1947 Act becomes applicable.
The Tribunal had followed the decision of the ITAT, Delhi Bench 'B', reported in the case of Income-tax Officer, District VIII (5), New Delhi v. Dr. P.L. Narula,1 which had correctly interpreted the provisions.
In our opinion, the view taken by the Tribunal is correct and accordingly, we answer the question referred in both these references in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the assessee.
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Commissioner of Income-tax
v.
K. Ramaiah
M.K. SRINIVASA IYENGAR AND M. RAMA JOIS, JJ.
IT REFERRED CASE NOS. 93 OF 1977 AND 122 OF 1978
AUGUST 20, 1980
JUDGMENT
Rama Jois, J.—The ITAT, Bangalore Bench, Bangalore, has referred the following common question for the opinion of this court:
"Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that pension received from the United Nations was exempt from taxation?"
In ITR C. No. 93 of 1977, the assessment year is 1972-73. The assessee was an erstwhile employee of the United Nations Organisation (hereinafter referred to as "the U.N.O."). During the previous year relevant to the assessment year, he received a sum of Rs. 12,780 as pension from the U.N.O. Before the ITO, the assessee claimed that the aforesaid amount received from the U.N.O. was exempt from taxation in view of the United Nations (Privileges and Immunities) Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as "the 1947 Act"). The ITO did not agree with the claim made by the assessee. He was of the view that the claim for exemption from taxation was not available in respect of pension. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the AAC. The appellate authority accepted the contention urged for the assessee. The ITO questioned the correctness of the appellate order before the Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal affirmed the order of the appellate authority. Thereafter, at the instance of the Commissioner, the question mentioned earlier has been referred for the opinion of this court.
In ITR C. No. 122 of 1978, the assessment year concerned is 1975-76. During the previous year relevant to the said assessment year, the assessee was in receipt of pension of Rs. 51,322 from the United Nations. In the said case also, claim for exemption made by the assessee before the ITO on a similar ground was rejected. But the same was accepted by the appellate authority and confirmed by the Tribunal. Thereafter, similar question has been referred for the opinion of this court at the instance of the Commissioner.
In our opinion, on a combined reading of the provisions of the 1947 Act and section 17 of the I.T. Act, 1961, the conclusion reached by the appellate authority and the Appellate Tribunal are correct. The 1947 Act was enacted which received the assent of the Governor-General on the 20th December, 1947. The preamble and section 2 of the said Act read as follows :
"Whereas it is expedient to give effect to the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations, and to enable similar privileges and immunities to be enjoyed by other international organisations and their representatives and officials ;
It is hereby enacted as follows :- . . .
2. Conferment on United Nations and its representatives and officers of certain privileges and immunities.-(1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any other law, the provisions set out in the Schedule to this Act of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities, adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on the 13th day of February, 1946, shall have the force of law in India.
(2) The Central Government may, from time to time, by notification in the Official Gazette, amend the Schedule in conformity with any amendments, duly made and adopted, of the provisions of the said Convention set out therein."
As can be seen from the preamble, the Act was enacted for giving effect to the conventions regarding the privileges and immunities of the United Nations and to enable the representatives and officials of the U.N.O. to enjoy those privileges and immunities. Section 2 of the 1947 Act makes the provisions incorporated in the Schedule to the Act as law in India. Section 18, section (b) of art. V of the Schedule, is the provision which is relevant to the facts of this case :
============================================================================
"ARTICLE V
Officials
Section 18 : Officials of the United Nations shall : . . .
(b) be exempt from taxation on the salaries and emoluments paid to them by the United Nations ;- . . . "
==================================================================================
The ITO, in both these cases, took the view that the effect of clause(b) of section 18 of art. V referred to above, was only to exempt the salaries and emoluments paid to the officials by the U.N.O., and this obviously meant when they were in service and, therefore, the said immunities did not extend to pensionary benefits. The ITO failed to notice that under section 17 of the I.T. Act, 1961, "salary" is defined as including any annuity or pension [vide clause (ii) of sub-section (1) of section 17]. As rightly pointed out by the AAC, the amount of pension received is chargeable to tax under the head "Salary" and, consequently, the meaning of the expression "Salary" given in section 17 of the I.T. Act, 1961, automatically applies to any amount of pension received by a person which is chargeable to tax under the head "Salary" Therefore, it follows that any amount of pension received by the assessee from the U.N.O. falls within the description of the word "salary" used in sections 14 and 17 of the I.T. Act, 1961, and, consequently, the immunity granted under section 18 of art. V of the Schedule to the 1947 Act becomes applicable.
The Tribunal had followed the decision of the ITAT, Delhi Bench 'B', reported in the case of Income-tax Officer, District VIII (5), New Delhi v. Dr. P.L. Narula,1 which had correctly interpreted the provisions.
In our opinion, the view taken by the Tribunal is correct and accordingly, we answer the question referred in both these references in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the assessee.
You need to be the querist or approved CAclub expert to take part in this query .
Click here to login now
Click here to login now
Similar Resolved Queries
Unanswered Queries
- Is this income indian or foreign income?
- 15ca /15cb whose income tax login? remitter or nri seller's login?
- TDS U/S. 194NF
- RCM applicability on Rent Paid by Registered Person to Unregistered Landlord for Residental Building
- Regarding Documentation & Compliances for Opening of Unit of Pvt Ltd.
- ITC temporary reversal and reclaim
- GST on export of services and Input Credit
- Applicable TDS rate for sale of property in Nov 2024
- Import license renewal
- REGARDING 25 AS DATE OF PAYMENT AND DATE OF BOOKING
- LAST YEAR 2022-23 ITC IN NEXT YEAR 2023-24 REPORITNG IN GSTR-9
- MIS MATCH OF INVOICE NUMBER
- IGST Credit-Show cause notice issued-confusion
- Issue of gst e invoice
- How to adjusted advances given or receipt
- Foreign vendor without PAN unable to to register due to non receipt of OTP on foreign number ?
- 133(6) DIN INVALID format error - ->WHERE TO REPLY 133(6) notice?
- Query for dubts
- Regarding einvoice taken on nil rated sales
- Strategical investment in Public listed company
Trending Online Classes
CAclubindia
