2013 (2) TMI 202 - HC - Income Tax

Set off of loss/unabsorbed depreciation Whether loss/unabsorbed depreciation of the eligible business under section 80-IA(4) can be set off against the income of other non-eligible business assessee is in the business of manufacturing of super enameled copper winding wires Assessee also put up a windmill for power generation In statement of income he set off the loss/unabsorbed depreciation from windmill i.e. eligible business with the income from the business of manufacturing of super enameled copper winding wires i.e. in eligible business Held that - It is a generally accepted principle that deeming provision of a particular section cannot be breathed into another section. Therefore, the deeming provision contained in section 80-IA(5) cannot override section 70(1) of the Act. The assessee incurs loss after claiming eligible depreciation. Hence, section 80-IA becomes insignificant since there is no profit from which this deduction can be claimed. Section 70(1) comes to the rescue of the assessee, whereby he is entitled to set off the losses from one source against income from another source under the same head of income. However, once set off is allowed under section 70(1) from the income from another source under the same head, another deduction on the same count is not permissible, i.e., during the subsequent years if the assessee makes surplus profits after claiming eligible allowances and he is entitled to claim deduction under section 80-IA, the earlier benefit given under other sections of the Act should be taken into account before granting deduction under section 80-IA. Therefore set off was allowed Against the revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Interpretation of section 80-IA(4) regarding set off of loss/unabsorbed depreciation against income from non-eligible business.
2. Allowability of setting off depreciation loss/income from power generation business against profits from manufacturing business.
3. Eligibility of setting off non-taxable income under section 80-IA against non-eligible business income.
4. Application of section 70(1) for setting off losses from one source against income from another source under the same head.
5. Interpretation of section 80-IA(5) and its interaction with section 70(1) in the context of claiming deductions.
6. Comparison and analysis of the judgment with the decision in Synco Industries Ltd. v. Assessing Officer case.

Analysis:
1. The primary issue in this case revolved around the interpretation of section 80-IA(4) concerning the set off of loss/unabsorbed depreciation against income from non-eligible business. The Tribunal directed the assessing authority to set off the loss from windmill operation against income from other sources, which was challenged by the Revenue as perverse and arbitrary.

2. The assessee, engaged in manufacturing copper wires and power generation, claimed depreciation on a windmill installation. The Assessing Officer initially disallowed the depreciation as the windmill was installed in a different financial year. Subsequently, the assessee set off profits from the copper wire business against the windmill depreciation, leading to unabsorbed depreciation. The Commissioner upheld this disallowance, citing contravention of law by setting off depreciation loss against copper wire profits.

3. The Tribunal, however, allowed the carried forward loss of the eligible business to be set off against subsequent years' eligible business income, emphasizing the liberal construction of section 80-IA for economic growth promotion. The Tribunal highlighted that deeming provisions of section 80-IA(5) cannot override section 70(1), allowing set off of losses from one source against income from another under the same head.

4. Referring to the Synco Industries Ltd. case, the Tribunal justified its decision by clarifying that while section 80-IA(6) computes deduction based on profits from an industrial undertaking, the gross total income includes profits from priority undertakings. Therefore, losses from one division must be adjusted before determining gross total income for claiming deductions under Chapter VI-A.

5. Consequently, the Tribunal's order was upheld as per the Supreme Court's interpretation, affirming no error in the decision. The judgment favored the assessee, dismissing the Revenue's appeal and emphasizing the importance of interpreting tax provisions in a manner that promotes economic growth.

6. The judgment provides a comprehensive analysis of the interaction between different tax provisions, emphasizing the need for a purposive interpretation to achieve the legislative objectives. The decision aligns with established legal principles and precedents, ensuring consistency in tax law application and promoting fairness in tax assessments.