1995 (9) TMI 104 - AT - Income Tax

Summary

Issues Involved:

1. Interpretation of the term "profit" in sub-s. (3) of s. 80HHC.
2. Whether loss under sub-s. (3) should be ignored while applying the proviso to sub-s. (3).
3. Computation of "profits of business" under cl. (baa) of Expln. to s. 80HHC.
4. Eligibility for deduction under s. 80HHC when there is a loss.
5. Validity of Form 10CCAC submitted by the assessee.

Summary:

1. Interpretation of "Profit" in sub-s. (3) of s. 80HHC:

The assessee, a sea food exporter, filed a revised return showing a deduction u/s 80HHC of Rs. 24,41,266 but limited the claim to Rs. 11,29,813. The AO recomputed the deduction and held that since the net result was a loss, the assessee was not eligible for any deduction u/s 80HHC. The CIT(A) held that the adjustments made by the AO were debatable issues and deleted the disallowance. The Tribunal noted that the term "profit" in sub-s. (3) of s. 80HHC should not include losses, and a liberal construction should be applied to advance the relief intended for exporters.

2. Loss Under sub-s. (3) and Proviso Application:

The Tribunal held that even if the computation under sub-s. (3) results in a loss, the proviso to sub-s. (3) should be construed independently to allow the assessee the deduction of an amount equal to 90% of the sums referred to in cl. (iiia), (iiib), and (iiic) of s. 28. The Tribunal emphasized that s. 80HHC is a benevolent section designed to benefit exporters and should be interpreted liberally.

3. Computation of "Profits of Business" Under cl. (baa) of Expln. to s. 80HHC:

The Tribunal admitted the assessee's plea regarding the computation of "profits of business" and directed the AO to quantify the profits in terms of cl. (baa) of Expln. to s. 80HHC. The Tribunal clarified that certain receipts, such as service charges from export houses, should not be considered as "charges" and should not be deducted from the profits of the business.

4. Eligibility for Deduction Under s. 80HHC When There is a Loss:

The Tribunal held that the assessee would be entitled to the deduction under the proviso to sub-s. (3) of s. 80HHC even if there is no profit under the main provision of sub-s. (3). The Tribunal directed the AO to quantify the amount of deduction and allow the same subject to the availability of total income.

5. Validity of Form 10CCAC Submitted by the Assessee:

The Tribunal rejected the Revenue's contention that the defective Form 10CCAC should disqualify the assessee from the deduction. The Tribunal directed that an opportunity should be given to the assessee to cure the defects in the Form.

Conclusion:

The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, with directions to the AO to verify the computation and quantify the deduction in accordance with the Tribunal's observations.