1992 (10) TMI 49 - HC - Income Tax

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Allowability of development rebate carry forward for assessment years 1967-68 and 1968-69.
2. Justification of the Tribunal's direction to determine and carry forward development rebate for set off in subsequent profitable years.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Allowability of Development Rebate Carry Forward for Assessment Years 1967-68 and 1968-69:

The assessee, engaged in the manufacture of sugar, claimed development rebate for plant and machinery installed in the assessment years 1967-68 and 1968-69. The Income-tax Officer denied the claim on the ground that the necessary development rebate reserve was not created as required by sub-section (3) of section 34 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessee contended that due to losses in those years, the reserve could not be created, but the rebate should be quantified and carried forward to subsequent years when profits were earned. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner dismissed the claim, but the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal accepted it, holding that the rebate could be carried forward even if the reserve was not created in the loss years.

2. Justification of the Tribunal's Direction to Determine and Carry Forward Development Rebate for Set Off in Subsequent Profitable Years:

The Tribunal directed the Income-tax Officer to quantify the development rebate for the years in question and carry it forward for set off in subsequent profitable years. The Revenue challenged this, asserting that the creation of the reserve in the relevant year of installation was obligatory, even in the absence of profits. The Supreme Court in Shri Shubhlaxmi Mills Ltd. v. Addl. CIT [1989] 177 ITR 193 had held that the reserve must be created in the year of installation or the first use, even if there were no profits. However, the Finance Act, 1990, amended section 34(3)(a) retrospectively, removing the mandatory requirement to create the reserve in loss years. The High Court noted that it must apply the law as amended retrospectively. The amended section 34(3)(a) allows the reserve to be created in any previous year in which the development rebate is to be allowed or in any earlier year, but not earlier than the year of installation or first use. Thus, the Tribunal's direction was upheld as it aligned with the amended provisions, allowing the rebate to be carried forward and set off in subsequent profitable years, provided the reserve is created within the stipulated period.

Conclusion:

The High Court affirmed the Tribunal's decision, holding that the assessee could carry forward the development rebate for set off in subsequent years of profit, subject to the creation of the requisite reserve within the stipulated period. Both questions were answered in the affirmative, in favor of the assessee and against the Revenue. The assessee was entitled to costs assessed at rupees three hundred.