Skip to main content

Blog # 1. Gift Expenses

This article specifically focuses on gift expenses incurred by businesses for its clients on festive occasions and other such occasions, etc., and its treatment with respect to the allowance under the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Businesses generally offer gifts to their clients to set up long-lasting and durable relationship with them, and these serve as an expense to expand and earn income for the business which in turn lead to deduction of these expenses from the income so as to pay less tax[1]. The important principle to understand here is that the expenses that are incurred should be in the nature of business promotion and not in the nature of capital expenditure and personal expenses of the assesse.

Case Laws Dealing with Such Expenses

  • Jaikisan Agarwal vs. Assistant commissioner of Income tax[2]
In relation to determining the genuineness of gift. It is only the fact of the donor having transferred the money into the hands of donee and the availability of the funds at that time in the case of donor which are the material factors to be proved in evidence for holding the genuineness of the gift.
  • Agfa India private Ltd. Vs. Assistant commissioner of Income tax[3]
In this case, the Assessing officer and Commissioner, Income tax had made a disallowance of gift expenses merely because confirmation from the third-party could not be furnished, but on appeal, this decision of AO/commissioner was not accepted and gift expenses were allowed for deduction and it was held that since assesse produced the required expenditure documents, confirmation from the third-party or receiver need not be the reason to disallow the gift expenses for deduction. Thereby, all expenses made for promotion of business except capital expenditure and personal expense be allowed for deduction against income to determine the tax liability under Sec 37(1) of Income Tax Act, 1961.
There are various expenses that can be incurred by business on clients with the objective to expand the customer base and achieve the objective of high profits. These expenses can be in form of giving gifts on the wedding of the client, entertainment, travel and excursions etc. but, it must be noted that the Income Tax Act only provides for these deductions when the gift expenses are for the exclusive benefit of the client and is extendable to the relatives of the client if it is not detrimental to the very principle for which the deduction is allowed. In terms of Sec 123 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, a gift of immovable property, which is not registered is bad in law and can‘t pass any title to the decree.

Deductions for the Business

These deductions are to be examined by the assessing officer because they may have the character of tax evasion and money laundering.
Various forms of the gift qualifying for such deduction are as follows:-
  • Gift can be in form of cash;
  • Gift can be in the form of movable property;
  • Gift can be in the form of immovable property
Businesses have to keep in mind that these deductions don’t exceed the income and completely offset any income liable to be taxed.
For example, a real estate agent might give a client, who purchases a house a Rs. 10000, a gift card from a home improvement store or a Rs. 1000 bottle of wine. The agent attaches a note with the gift asking for future business and referrals accompanied by three business cards.
Further, the said expenditure should be justifiable and reasonable considering the size and processes of the Company.
For example, the CBDT has issued a circular stating that any expense incurred in providing freebies to medical practitioners by pharmaceutical companies in violation of the provisions of the Indian Medical Council (Professional Conduct, Etiquette and Ethics) Regulations, 2002 shall be inadmissible under Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act[4], being an expense prohibited by the law. The sum equivalent to value of freebies enjoyed by the medical practitioner shall be taxable as business income or income from other sources depending on the facts of the case.

Deduction for the Client

Any gift to a public servant is strictly prohibited by law and can invite serious punishment as it is considered to be a bribe.
Under Section 56(ii)[5], deduction for donee (receiver) or income from gift is subjected to certain conditions like:-
  • Gift value should not be more than Rs. 50,000 to claim deduction and over and above it will be liable to taxation for the receiver of gift;
  • Gift over the value of Rs. 50,000 may be allowed deduction if it is given on the wedding of the receiver or if it is given by a relative (definition and limit provided in Income Tax Act) of the receiver.


It is customary in India to give gifts to clients on various festive occasions like Diwali, Christmas, etc. These gifts serve as business promotional expenses. They can be claimed as an offset against the income and deduction can be claimed on that, subject to business size and operations. The Government allows these deductions to improve the business climate among people, but it should be kept in mind that these deductions are prohibited if they are presumptive of tax evasion by business and to carry money laundering activities. These promotional expenses are very important for businesses to improve their brand image and to increase the customer base by alluring with attractive gifts the prospective client.
  • [1] <>accessed on 2/6/2016
  • [2] (2000) 66 TTJ Pune 704
  • [3] 2001 123 STC 108 Mad
  • [4] See, Sec 37(1) of Income Tax Act, 1961
  • [5] See, Sec 56(ii) of Income tax Act, 1961


Popular posts from this blog

Blog # 26. Concept of Real Income under the Income Tax Act, 1961

  What is Income ? Before understanding the concept of Real Income, it shall be important to go through the the term “Income” and “Real”. Income is defined under S.2(24) of the Income Tax Act, 1961(Hereinafter referred as “the Act”). The definition as provided under the Act is an inclusive definition so as to cover up all the usual as well as unusual items, however it certainly does not define it in a way that we can be said it to be precise. The same can be understood by various Judge Made Laws. The first and the lead amongst them is a Privy Council Judgment in the case of Kamakshya Narain   Singh CIT 11 ITR 513 (PC)         Facts The assesse was a “Raja” gave mining lease and He received payments by way of royalty for coal mines leased out to various lessees. The case of the Assessee was that this royalty income received by the Assessee was nothing but the recoupment of the resources which shall be exhausted by the end of the lease and thus the same was not income bu

Reference to TPO- Law & Important Judgements

Sec 92CA provides that the Assessing Officer (“AO”) may make reference to Transfer Pricing officer (“TPO”) for computation of arm's length price (ALP) of international transaction entered into by assessee if the AO considers necessary and expedient to do so with prior approval of Principal Commissioner or Commissioner. Further, CBDT instruction No. 3/ 2003 made it mandatory for AO to make such reference if the value of international transactions exceeded Rs. 5 crores. Transfer pricing arena has seen many disputes revolving around making reference to TPO and powers/duties of AO and TPO around that. In a recent landmark decision in the case of Tata Consultancy Services Ltd., the Mumbai ITAT held that AO cannot make a reference to the TPO mechanically without applying his mind to the TP report or to any other material or information, despite CBDT Instruction No. 3/2003.The CBDT has recently revised CBDT Instruction No. 3/2003, by issuing  Instruction No. 15/2015 ,  which stated tha

Discussion on purchases held Bogus

Introduction Bombay High Court in Mahalaxmi Cotton Ginning Pressing and Oil Industries v The State of Maharashtra & Others (2012) 51 VST 1 (Bom.) (HC) (SLP dismissed by the Supreme Court) dealing with set off under section 48(5) and 51(7) of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002. Issue before the court was when dealer collects the taxes and does not deposit it in the Government Treasury, can the purchased be entitled to set off of the said taxes. Validity of the provision was challenged. Upholding the validity of the provision the court held that .Section 48(5) uses the expression “actually paid” in to the Government treasury. The words “actually paid” must receive their ordinary and natural meaning. There is no reason for the court to depart from the plain and ordinary meaning of these words when used in the context of section 48(5). To accept the contention that “actually paid…in the Government Treasury” should be read to mean the tax that ought t