Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD" Indian Courts Cannot Invalidate Foreign Arbitral Awards Passed Under Foreign Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enforces Texas-Based Award Despite Commercial Court’s Contrary Decree Sudden Quarrel over Mound of Earth — Not Murder but Culpable Homicide: Allahabad High Court Eligibility Flows from Birth, Not a Certificate Date: Delhi High Court Strikes Down Rule Fixing Arbitrary Cut-Off for OBC-NCL Certificates in CAPF (AC) Recruitment Bar Under Order II Rule 2 CPC Cannot Be Invoked Where Specific Performance Was Legally Premature Due To Statutory Impediments: P&H High Court Calling Wife by Her Caste Name in Public Just Before Suicide is Immediate Cause of Self-Immolation: Madras High Court Upholds Husband’s Conviction Under Section 306 IPC No Work No Pay Is Not a Universal Rule: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dock Identification Without Prior TIP Is Absolutely Useless: P&H High Court Upholds Acquittal in Attempt to Murder Case Filing Forged Court Pleadings in Union Government’s Name is Criminal Contempt: Karnataka High Court Sentences Litigant to Jail Execution of Will Proved, But Probate Justly Denied Due to Concealment of Property Sale: Delhi High Court Mere Designation Doesn’t Establish Criminal Liability: Bombay High Court Quashes Proceedings Against ICICI Officials in Octroi Evasion Case Fraud on Power Voids the Order: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Karnataka BJP Leader R. Ashoka, Slams Politically Motivated Prosecution Cause of Fire Is Immaterial If Fire Itself Is Insured Peril: Supreme Court Rebukes Insurer’s Repudiation Dragging a Trained Army Officer Up 20 Steps Without Resistance? The Story Lacks Credence: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Army Officer’s Murder Semen Stains Alone Do Not Prove Rape: Supreme Court Acquits Doctor Accused of Rape No Mortgage, No SARFAESI: Supreme Court Rules Against NEDFi, Says Recovery Action in Nagaland Without Security Agreement Was Illegal Parity Cannot Be Denied by Geography: Supreme Court Holds Jharkhand Bound by Patna HC's Judgment, Orders Pay Revision for Industries Officer Once Power Flows Continuously from a Synchronized Turbine, It Is No Longer Infirm: Supreme Court Orders TANGEDCO to Pay Fixed Charges to Penna Electricity

ESOP Discounts Are Deductible as Business Expenses: ITAT Mumbai Affirms in HDFC Bank Case

30 December 2024 10:07 AM

By: sayum


The tribunal holds that ESOP discounts are allowable as deductions under Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, aligning with past judgments and SEBI guidelines. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has ruled in favor of HDFC Bank regarding the deductibility of discounts on Employee Stock Option Plans (ESOPs) as a business expense under Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act. This decision affirms the applicability of prior judgments and SEBI guidelines, ensuring consistency in the treatment of ESOP-related expenditures.

HDFC Bank granted stock options to its employees, amortizing the discount amount over the vesting period as per the Securities Exchange Board of India (SEBI) guidelines. The bank claimed this amortization as a revenue expenditure under Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act. However, the Assessing Officer and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) had earlier rejected this claim, categorizing the expense as capital in nature.

The ITAT referred to the Karnataka High Court's decision in CIT vs. Biocon Ltd., which established that discounts on ESOPs are deductible as they aim to secure consistent services from employees rather than waste capital. The tribunal noted, “The primary object of offering ESOPs is not to waste capital but to earn profits by securing consistent services of employees”​​.

The tribunal observed that the deduction of the ESOP discount over the vesting period aligns with the accounting treatment mandated by SEBI guidelines. This consistency in accounting treatment and legal provisions was a crucial factor in the tribunal's decision​​.

In its ruling, the ITAT heavily relied on the precedent set by the Special Bench of ITAT in Biocon Ltd. vs. DCIT and subsequent affirmation by the Karnataka High Court. The tribunal also cited the Delhi High Court's decision in PVR Ltd. vs. CIT, which supported the view that ESOP discounts are a form of employee remuneration and thus deductible as revenue expenditure​​.

The tribunal concluded that the discount on ESOPs should be treated as remuneration to employees for their continuity of service, thus qualifying as a deductible expense under Section 37(1). The ruling emphasized that the expenditure’s nature as a revenue expense is not negated by its association with the procurement of capital assets (i.e., shares), as the underlying purpose is to incentivize and retain employees.

“The discount on issue of ESOPs is an allowable deduction under Section 37(1) as its primary objective is to earn profits by securing consistent services of employees,” noted the tribunal, underscoring the operational purpose of ESOPs over their capital nature​​.

The ITAT's ruling reinforces the judicial stance that ESOP-related discounts are legitimate business expenses under Indian tax law. By aligning its decision with established precedents and regulatory guidelines, the tribunal has provided clarity and consistency for corporations leveraging stock options to retain talent. This decision is expected to influence similar cases and support corporate practices that align employee incentives with business growth objectives.

Date of Decision: 05 July 2024

 

Latest Legal News