1996 (10) TMI 67 - HC - Income Tax

Summary

Issues: Interpretation of section 80P(2)(a)(iv) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 regarding deduction on gross income from sale of fertilizers to members and proportionate expenses deduction.

Analysis:
The judgment dealt with a petition under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, where the assessee, a co-operative marketing society, sought a direction to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to refer a question of law regarding the deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(iv). The assessee had claimed exemption on the gross income from the sale of fertilizers to its members, but the Income-tax Officer contended that only net income after deducting expenses was exempted under the provision.

The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal upheld the Income-tax Officer's decision, stating that section 80AB required deduction to be made on net income, not gross income. The Tribunal relied on Distributors (Baroda) P. Ltd. v. Union of India [1985] 155 ITR 120 to support this interpretation. The Tribunal also rejected the assessee's plea to refer the question to the court, citing the Supreme Court's decision in Distributors (Baroda) P. Ltd.'s case [1985] 155 ITR 120 as conclusive.

However, the court found that the issue was covered in favor of the assessee by a previous judgment in Punjab State Co-operative's case [1981] 128 ITR 189, which was upheld by the Supreme Court. The court also distinguished the interpretation in Distributors (Baroda) P. Ltd.'s case [1985] 155 ITR 120 as not directly applicable to the present case. The court directed the Tribunal to refer the question of law to determine whether proportionate expenses should be deducted from the gross income before allowing the deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(iv).

In conclusion, the judgment clarified that the deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(iv) should be allowed on the gross income from the sale of fertilizers to members, as per the precedent set by Punjab State Co-operative's case [1981] 128 ITR 189, and directed the Tribunal to refer the question for further consideration.