9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Whether the assessee is entitled to claim a business loss due to devaluation of the rupee? Analysis: The judgment by the High Court of BOMBAY involved the case of an assessee, Messrs Vitre Engineering Co., Bombay, which operated as a consulting engineering firm in India under the umbrella of Messrs Vitre Corporation, a U.S.-based entity. The issue at hand revolved around the treatment of expenses incurred by the Indian division of the assessee, which included payments to American employees in dollars and overhead expenses charged by the head office. Following the devaluation of the rupee in 1966, the assessee faced increased liabilities due to the change in the exchange rate. The assessee claimed a net loss for the previous year ending December 31, 1966, attributing it to the devaluation loss. The Income Tax Officer (ITO) initially rejected the claim, stating that the loss did not arise in the course of earning income. The assessee contended that the increased liability post-devaluation constituted a business loss and should be allowed in computing total income. The matter was then appealed to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner (AAC), who rejected the claim, stating that there was no legal liability on the part of the assessee and that the devaluation did not increase the legal liability of the Indian branch. However, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal accepted the contentions of the assessee, emphasizing that the increased liability was in respect of the trading liability of the Indian business, which was considered a separate entity for income tax purposes. The Tribunal noted that the assessee was required to pay the increased rupee amount to purchase the same amount of dollars post-devaluation. It also highlighted the permission granted by the Reserve Bank of India for such transactions, supporting the assessee's claim for the deduction of the entire loss. The Commissioner of Income-tax challenged the Tribunal's decision, leading to a reference to the High Court. The High Court, after considering relevant precedents, upheld the Tribunal's decision, ruling in favor of the assessee. It emphasized that the assessee maintained accounts on the mercantile system, requiring provision for the increased liability in the assessment year in question. The court concluded that the assessee was entitled to claim the full amount of the loss as a business loss during the assessment year, dismissing the Commissioner's arguments against the claim. In conclusion, the High Court's judgment clarified that the devaluation-induced loss incurred by the assessee was a valid business loss that could be claimed for deduction in the assessment year, affirming the Tribunal's decision and ruling in favor of the assessee.
|
