Case Law Details
RELEVANT PARAGRAPH
8. We have considered the issue. In order to appreciate the contentions it is necessary to refer to the provisions of section 80R relevant for the year, which is as under:-
“80R. Where the gross total income of an individual who is a citizen of India includes any remuneration received by him outside India from any University or other educational institution established outside India or [any other association or body established outside India], for any service rendered by him during his stay outside India in his capacity as a professor, teacher or research worker in such University, institution, association or body, there shall be [allowed, in computing the total income of the individual, [a deduction from such remuneration of an amount equal to –
(i) sixty pr cent of such remuneration for an assessment year beginning an the 1st day of April, 2001;
(ii) forty-five per cent of such remuneration for an assessment year beginning on the 1st day of April, 202;
(iii) thirty per cent of such remuneration for an assessment year beginning on the 1st day of April, 2003;
(iv) fifteen per cent of such remuneration for an assessment year beginning on the 1st day of April, 2004,
as is brought into India by, or on behalf of, the assessee in convertible foreign exchange within a period of six months from the end of the previous year or within such further period as the competent authority may allow in this behalf and no deduction shall be allowed in respect of the assessment year beginning on the 1st day of April, 2005 and any subsequent assessment year]:
Provided that no deduction under this section shall be allowed unless the assessee furnishes a certificate, in the prescribed form, along with the return of income, certifying that the deduction has been correctly claimed in accordance with the provisions of this section.”
9. As can be seen from the above the conditions are as under: –
(a) that an individual who is a citizen of India
(b) includes any remuneration received by him outside India
(c) from any university or other educational institutions established outside India or any other Association or Body outside India
(d) services rendered by him by staying outside India
(e) in his capacity as a professor, teacher or research worker in such university, institution, association or body.
10. The assessee fulfills the conditions (a) being an individual and citizen of India, (b) as he received the remuneration from outside India, (c) also from a body established outside India and (d) also for the service rendered by him during his stay outside India. The issue is with reference to condition (e), i.e. in his capacity as a professor, teacher or research workers in such university, institution, association or body. There is no doubt with reference to the amounts which were remitted, are from various bodies established outside India, for pulse reading in Ayurvedic medicine and to a large extent these remittances were certified either for consultation on pulse reading or for teaching pulse reading. These remunerations have not been received from any individual person but from a Body established outside India. To that extent there is no doubt. Even the certificates of remittance do indicate that these were remuneration paid for the services rendered in pulse reading and Ayurvedic medicine. The only issue is whether these services are rendered in the capacity as a professor, teacher or researcher worker in such institution, association or body.
11. The word ‘remuneration’ had a wider connotation as it does not restrict to the amounts received as a salary alone. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Central Board of Direct Taxes vs. Aditya V. Birla 170 ITR 137 referring to section 80RRA considered that there is no warrant for restricting the meaning of expression remuneration. It is held that remuneration will cover fees paid to a consultant or technician or so. Now the words used in the section has a bearing that the assessee should have a capacity as a professor, teacher or research worker. These words have not been defined in the Act but generally these are associated with certain professions. A professor is generally associated with a person who is employed by a University whereas a teacher or a research worker need not be associated with an educational institution or to a university. A teacher can teach any subject in which he has proficiency and need not be employed as a teacher in a school or a college to get into the definition of ‘teacher’. If somebody uses his expertise and knowledge on a specific subject to train a large number of people, he can be considered as a teacher (a ‘Guru’) in that subject or if a person also undertakes to conduct research on the subject in addition to his teaching/other assignments, he can also be called a research worker. In this particular case, the doctor is a professional in his own capacity as a doctor and he also specializes in Ayurvedic medicine, particularly in pulse reading, which is an ancient methodology of identifying the disease by holding pulse of a person. This specific technique is a part of Ayurvedic teaching which is not practiced in western medicine, hence, the assessee, as part of giving holistic medicine to western doctors, has undertaken to conduct workshops and lectures abroad for disseminating the knowledge of pulse reading to various doctors organized by a Body established outside India and received remuneration from such Body as part of services rendered to them. In our-view, the receipts do satisfy the conditions mentioned in section 80R that the services are rendered in his capacity as a teacher or research worker in such Institution, Association of Body. The amounts are not his professional receipts as he has no permission to practise in a foreign country. The CIT(A)’s objection that the assessee has received these amounts as part of propagating his herbal products of the company is without any basis. As submitted by the learned counsel, the assessee could have as well claimed deduction under section 80HHC, if these receipts were accounted for as sale of herbal products abroad as the deduction under section 80HHC was more than what was claimed by the assessee individual in his capacity.
