2020 (2) TMI 332 - HC - Income Tax

Deduction u/s 80HHC - Receipts by way of Shipping Agency fees and hire charges of machinery and installations - receipts under the head extraction charges could be considered as part of the total turnover as defined in the said clause (ba), for the purpose of computation of the deduction under section 80 HHC - subsidiary companies on loans lent to them to meet their working capital requirements, and claimed by the Appellant as forming part of the income from Profits and gains of business could be considered as assessable as Income from other sources - HELD THAT - Parties agree that the aforesaid substantial questions of law had been framed even in Tax Appeal 2020 (2) TMI 309 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT , which relates to the Assessment Year 1997-98. By a separate Judgment and Order, we have today disposed of Tax Appeal. Therefore, even these two appeals are disposed of in terms of what we have held in our Judgment and Order delivered today disposing.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Interpretation of tax laws regarding various receipts and deductions for different assessment years.

Analysis:
1. The High Court of Bombay heard two appeals related to different assessment years but with identical issues. The appeals questioned the treatment of receipts like "Shipping Agency fees," "hire charges of machinery and installations," and "extraction charges" under specific clauses of the tax laws. The court was asked to determine whether these receipts should be reduced from gross or net receipts for tax computation purposes.

2. Another issue raised was whether interest received from subsidiary companies on loans lent to them should be classified as part of "Profits and gains of business" or "Income from other sources." The court was tasked with deciding the appropriate categorization of this interest income for tax assessment.

3. The court also examined whether certain receipts in the appellant's accounts, such as proceeds of services, hire of ships/transhippers, hire of barges, and repairs of vessels by Shipyards, should be reduced as per specific tax clauses. The court needed to determine the treatment of these receipts, considering their substantial costs and relation to the appellant's main business activity.

4. Additionally, the court was asked to rule on the tax treatment of demurrage payable to non-resident ship owners/charterers of vessels, where tax was not deducted as per the Tribunal's findings. The issue revolved around whether this demurrage could be considered disallowable under a particular tax section.

5. The court noted that similar substantial questions of law had been framed in another appeal related to a different assessment year, which was also disposed of on the same day. As a result, the court decided to dispose of the current appeals based on the judgment and order delivered in the previously disposed appeal.

6. Ultimately, the High Court of Bombay disposed of both appeals in line with its judgment and order in the related appeal, without imposing any costs on either party.