9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Claim for development rebate and creation of appropriate reserve. Analysis: The case involved a dispute regarding the claim for development rebate and the creation of an appropriate reserve by the assessee for the assessment year 1972-73. The assessee, engaged in textile goods manufacturing, claimed a development rebate of Rs. 8,29,641 but only credited a development rebate reserve of Rs. 4 lakhs. The Income-tax Officer allowed a rebate of Rs. 5,33,333, corresponding to the reserve created. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner directed the Income-tax Officer to carry forward the balance of Rs. 2,96,308, following a decision of the Calcutta High Court. The Department contended that the creation of a reserve was mandatory under sections 33 and 34, citing a decision of the Gujarat High Court. However, the Tribunal rejected the Department's arguments and upheld the decision of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The High Court referred to a recent Supreme Court decision which clarified the requirement of creating a reserve fund in the relevant previous year, as per the Explanation to clause (a) of section 34(3). The Supreme Court emphasized that the creation of a reserve fund is essential to claim the deduction for development rebate, regardless of the profit and loss account's result. The Court highlighted that mere book entries suffice for creating the reserve fund, with entries made before finalizing the profit and loss account. The Supreme Court overruled a Bombay High Court decision and emphasized the mandatory nature of creating the reserve fund for claiming development rebate. Ultimately, the High Court ruled in favor of the Revenue and against the assessee, stating that the assessee failed to comply with the mandatory condition of section 34(3) and, therefore, was not entitled to any development rebate or carry forward of unabsorbed development rebate. The Court emphasized that if no development rebate is allowable, the question of carrying forward unabsorbed development rebate does not arise. Both questions in the reference were answered in the negative, favoring the Revenue. In conclusion, the judgment clarified the mandatory requirement of creating a reserve fund in the relevant previous year for claiming development rebate, as per the provisions of the Income-tax Act. The decision highlighted the significance of complying with statutory conditions for availing tax benefits and emphasized the importance of following legal provisions for tax deductions and rebates.
|
