9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2011 (3) TMI 1032 - HC - Income TaxDuty drawback - whether be included while computing deduction under section 80-IA - Held that - This issue has to be decided in favour of the Revenue in view of the judgment of Liberty India v. CIT 2009 (8) TMI 63 - SUPREME COURT wherein held that Duty drawback receipt/DEPB benefits do not form part of the net profits of eligible industrial undertaking for the purposes of Sections 80I/80-IA/80-IB . Disallowance u/s 43B - addition on account of provision for pension - Held that - In agreement with the view of the CIT (A) that the pension scheme of the assessee does not envisage any regular contribution to any fund or trust or any other entity. The pension scheme provides that pension would be paid by the appellant to its employees on their attaining the retirement age or resigning after having rendered services for specified years. Thus, where the liability on this account accrues from year to year, the same is payable on retirement/resignation of the eligible employees. In view thereof, the ratio of the judgment of Metal Box Company of India Ltd. v. Their Workmen 1968 (8) TMI 53 - SUPREME Court and Bharat Earth Movers v. CIT 2000 (8) TMI 4 - SUPREME Court would clearly get attracted. For disqualifying a provision for leave encashment, a specific clause had to be inserted by the Legislature as the Legislature was conscious of the fact that this clause would not be covered by the existing clause (b) of section 43B of the Act. In favour of assessee.
Issues:
1. Eligibility of duty drawback for deduction in computing book profit under section 115JA of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 2. Inclusion of duty drawback while computing deduction under section 80-IA of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 3. Addition on account of provision for pension. 4. Disallowance of provision for pension under section 43B of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Eligibility of Duty Drawback for Deduction: The High Court found that the question of eligibility of duty drawback for deduction in computing book profit under section 115JA did not arise in the appeal concerning the assessment year 2001-02. The Tribunal had already decided on this matter for the assessment years 1999-2000 and 2001-02, making it irrelevant to the current appeal. Inclusion of Duty Drawback for Computing Deduction: Regarding the inclusion of duty drawback while computing deduction under section 80-IA, the respondent/assessee's counsel conceded in favor of the Revenue based on the Supreme Court judgment in Liberty India v. CIT. This issue was decided in favor of the Revenue. Provision for Pension and Section 43B: The case involved the provision for pension made by the assessee, following the mercantile system of accounting. The Assessing Officer disallowed the provision under section 43B(b) of the Act, citing the absence of contribution to the pension fund. However, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) reversed this decision, leading to a dispute on the applicability of section 43B(b) to the pension provision. Interpretation of Section 43B(b): Section 43B(b) disallows deductions unless actual payments are made. The High Court analyzed whether the provision for pension fell under the funds specified in the section. The court held that the provision did not qualify as a contribution to any of the specified funds, emphasizing that the clause should be read ejusdem generis, limiting its scope to funds for employee welfare. Legislative Intent and Ascertained Liability: The court highlighted the legislative intent behind section 43B(b) to disallow certain statutory liabilities not discharged. It noted that the provision for pension, being an ascertained liability for employee benefits, did not require contribution to a fund. Referring to the insertion of clause (f) in section 43B, the court affirmed that the pension scheme did not fall under the disallowed provisions. Judgment and Precedents: The High Court agreed with the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) that the pension scheme did not necessitate regular contributions to a fund. Citing relevant judgments, the court ruled in favor of the assessee, stating that the liability accrued yearly and was payable upon retirement/resignation of employees. Consequently, the questions of law related to the provision for pension were decided against the Revenue and in favor of the assessee. Conclusion: The High Court allowed the appeal concerning the provision for pension, deciding against the Revenue on questions related to the disallowance under section 43B of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The judgment provided a detailed analysis of the legislative intent behind section 43B(b) and the applicability of the provision for pension within the statutory framework.
|
