Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 7
CASE NO.:
Appeal (civil) 4144 of 2007
PETITIONER:
A.M. MOOSA
RESPONDENT:
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TRIVANDRUM
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 10/09/2007
BENCH:
Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT & D.K. JAIN
JUDGMENT:
J U D G M E N T
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4144 OF 2007
[Arising out of SLP(C) No. 11814 of 2006]
Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT
1. Leave granted.
2. Challenge in this appeal is to the legality of order passed
by a Division Bench of Kerala High Court answering the reference
made to it in favour of the department and against the assessee
appellant.
3. Background facts in a nutshell are as follows.
For the assessment year 1992-93, the assessee appellant
had claimed deduction under Section 80-HHC of the Income Tax
Act, 1961, (in short, ’the Act’). The assessing officer disallowed the
claim on the ground that the ’profits of the business’ computed
under Section 80-HHC indicated a negative figure. An appeal was
preferred before Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), Cochin
Bench, hereinafter, referred to as ’the CIT(A)’. The said appellate
authority also was of the same view and dismissed the appeal. The
assessee appellant preferred an appeal before the Income Tax
Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, in short ’the ITAT’. By Order
dated 14th September, 1995 in ITA No. 498 (Coch)/1995, the view of
the assessing officer as well as of CIT(A) was affirmed. On being
moved for reference, ITAT referred the following questions for
adjudication by the High Court:
"(1) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of
the case, the Tribunal was justified in entertaining
the additional ground raised by the assessee on an
issue which had not been disputed earlier before the
assessing officer or the first appellate authority?
(2) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of
the case, the Tribunal is right in law in holding that
the payment received from the export houses under
the agreements could not partake the nature of
receipt towards "charges" mentioned in clause (baa) of
Explanation to Sec.80HHC?
(3) Whether, on the facts and in the
circumstances of the case, and on an interpretation of
Sec. 8OHHC(3) would the assessee be entitled to the
deduction in an amount equal to 90% of the sums
referred to in clause (iiia) (not being profits on sale of
a licence acquired from any other person) and clause
(iiib) and clause (iiic) of section 28, the same
proportion as the export turnover bears to the total
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 7
turnover to the business carried on by the assessee?
(4) Whether, on the facts and in the
circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in its
interpretation of the term ’profits of business’?
(5) Whether, on the facts and in the
circumstances of the case, the assessee is entitled to
the benefits of sec. 80HHC of the Income Tax Act?
4. By the impugned Judgment, the High Court held that the view
taken by the assessing officer, CIT(A) and ITAT was in order.
Accordingly, as noted above, the reference was answered in favour
of the department and against the assessee.
5. In support of the appeal, learned counsel for the appellant
submitted that the view taken by the High Court is clearly
untenable and does not reflect a true interpretation of the provision,
that is, Section 80-HHC of the Act. Learned counsel for the
Revenue on the other hand supported the orders stating that the
view taken is unexceptional. At this juncture, it should be
appropriate to take note of the relevant provision. Same reads as
follows:
"80-HHC. Deduction in respect of profits retained for
export business.- (1) Where an assessee, being an Indian
company or a person (other than a company) resident in
India, is engaged in the business of export out of India of
any goods or merchandise to which this section applies,
there shall, in accordance with and subject to the
provisions of this section, be allowed, in computing the
total income of the assessee, a deduction to the extent of
profits, referred to in sub-section (1-B) derived by the
assessee from the export of such goods or merchandise:
Provided that if the assessee, being a holder of
an Export House Certificate or a Trading House
Certificate (hereafter in this section referred to as an
export house or a trading house, as the case may
be,) issues a certificate referred to in clause (b) of
sub-section (4-A), that in respect of the amount of
the export turnover specified therein, the deduction
under this sub-section is to be allowed to a
supporting manufacturer, then the amount of
deduction in the case of the assessee shall be
reduced by such amount which bears to the total
profits derived by the assessee from the export of
trading goods, the same proportion as the amount
of export turnover specified in the said certificate
bears to the total export turnover of the assessee in
respect of such trading goods.
(1-A) Where the assessee, being a supporting
manufacturer, has during the previous year, sold
goods or merchandise to any export house or
trading house in respect of which the export house
or trading house has issued a certificate under the
proviso to sub-section (1), there shall, in accordance
with and subject to the provisions of this section, be
allowed in computing the total income of the
assessee, a deduction to the extent of profits,
referred to in sub-section (1-B) derived by the
assessee from the sale of goods or merchandise to
the export house or trading house in respect of
which the certificate has been issued by the export
house or trading house.
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 7
(3) For the purposes of sub-section (1), -
(a) where the export out of India is of goods or
merchandise manufactured or processed by the
assessee, the profits derived from such export shall
be the amount which bears to the profits of the
business, the same proportion as the export
turnover in respect of such goods bears to the total
turnover of the business carried on by the assessee;
(b) where the export out of India is of trading goods,
the profits derived from such export shall be the
export turnover in respect of such trading goods as
reduced by the direct costs and indirect costs
attributable to such export;
(c) where the export out of India is of goods or
merchandise manufactured [or processed] by the
assessee and of trading goods, the profits derived
from such export shall, -
(i) in respect of the goods or merchandise
manufactured [or processed] by the
assessee, be the amount which bears to
the adjusted profits of the business, the
same proportion as the adjusted export
turnover in respect of such goods bears
to the adjusted total turnover of the
business carried on by the assessee; and
(ii) in respect of trading goods, be the
export turnover in respect of such trading
goods as reduced by the direct and
indirect costs attributable to export of
such trading goods :
Provided that the profits computed
under clause (a) or clause (b) or
clause (c) of this sub-section shall be
further increased by the amount
which bears to ninety per cent of any
sum referred to in clause (iiia) (not
being profits on sale of a licence
acquired from any other person), and
clauses (iiib) and (iiic), of section 28,
the same proportion as the export
turnover bears to the total turnover of
business carried on by the assessee.
Explanation : For the purposes of this sub-section,-
(a) "adjusted export turnover" means the export
turnover as reduced by the export turnover in
respect of trading goods;
(b) "adjusted profits of the business" means the
profits of the business as reduced by the profits
derived from the business of export out of India of
trading goods as computed in the manner provided
in clause (b) of sub-section (3);
(c) "adjusted total turnover" means the total
turnover of the business as reduced by the export
turnover in respect of trading goods;
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 7
(d) "direct costs" means costs directly attributable to
the trading goods exported out of India including
the purchase price of such goods;
(e) "indirect costs" means costs, not being direct
costs, allocated in the ratio of the export turnover in
respect of trading goods to the total turnover;
(f) "trading goods" means goods which are not
manufactured or processed by the assessee.
(3A) For the purposes of sub-section (1A), profits
derived by a supporting manufacturer from the sale
of goods or merchandise shall be, -
(a) in a case where the business carried
on by the supporting manufacturer
consists exclusively of sale of goods or
merchandise to one or more Export
Houses or Trading Houses, the profits of
the business;
(b) in a case where the business carried
on by the supporting manufacturer does
not consist exclusively of sale of goods or
merchandise to one or more Export
Houses or Trading Houses, the amount
which bears to the profits of the business
the same proportion as the turnover in
respect of sale to the respective Export
House or Trading House bears to the total
turnover of the business carried on by
the assessee.
(4) The deduction under sub-section (1) shall not be
admissible unless the assessee furnishes in the
prescribed form, along with the return of income,
the report of an accountant, as defined in the
Explanation below sub-section (2) of section 288,
certifying that the deduction has been correctly
claimed in accordance with the provisions of this
section."
6. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that a reading of
Section 80-HHC would show that where the assessee exports goods
manufactured by him, he would be covered by sub-section (3) (a)
and only the profits of such business would be taken into account.
Where the assessee exports only trading goods then the profits of
those goods only would be taken into account in sub-section (3)(b).
Sub-section (3)(c) dealt with a case where the assessee exported
goods manufactured by him as well as trading goods. In such a
case profits from export of goods manufactured by the assessee
were to be considered separately and the profits from export of
trading goods were to be considered separately. If there were profits
from both then both the profits would be taken into consideration.
If there were profits only in respect of one type of exports then those
profits could not be negatived or set off against the loss from the
other export. The word "and" in Section 80-HHC (3)(c) has to be
liberally construed and cannot be taken to mean that both the
profits have to be clubbed or considered together. Persons who earn
valuable foreign exchange cannot be deprived of the benefits of his
export by adopting a construction which would defeat the very
purpose for which the provision has been enacted. The fact that
the word "and" does not mean that sub-clauses (3) (c)(i) and (ii) have
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 7
to be taken together is clear from the fact that in other sections,
such as Section 80-HHD, the legislature has used the words
"aggregate of". Wherever the legislature intended that both were to
be taken together it has used words like "aggregate of". When the
legislature has not used such words, it necessarily meant that the
intention of the legislature was that the two are not to be taken
together, but that each has to be considered separately and on its
own. Aim being to give an incentive for earning foreign exchange,
so long as there was a profit from export either of self manufactured
goods or from export of trading goods deduction has to be given for
that profit by ignoring a loss in respect of other export.
7. The stand needs careful consideration. Undoubtedly, Section
80-HHC has been incorporated with a view to providing incentive to
export houses. Even though a liberal interpretation has to be given
to such a provision, the interpretation has to be as per the wordings
of this section. If the wordings of the section are clear, then
benefits, which are not available under the section, cannot be
conferred by ignoring or misinterpreting words in the section. In
this case we are concerned with the wordings of sub-section (3)(c) of
Section 80-HHC. As noted earlier, sub-section (3)(a) deals with the
case where the export is only of self-manufactured goods. Sub-
section (3)(b) deals with the case where the export is only of trading
goods. Thus, when the legislature wanted to take exports from self-
manufactured goods or trading goods separately, it has already so
provided in sub-sections (3)(a) and (3)(b). It would not be denied
that the word "profit" in Section 80-HHC (1) and Sections 80-
HHC(3)(a) or (3)(b)means a positive profit. In other words, if there is
a loss then no deduction would be available under Section 80-HHC
(1) or (3)(a) or (3)(b). In arriving at the figure of positive profit, both
the profits and the losses will have to be considered. If the net
figure is a positive profit, then the assessee will be entitled to a
deduction. If the net figure is a loss then the assessee will not be
entitled to a deduction. Sub-section (3)(c) deals with cases where
the export is of both self-manufactured goods as well as trading
goods. The opening part of sub-section (3)(c) states "profits derived
from such export shall". Then follow clauses (i) and (ii). Between
clauses (i) and (ii) the word "and" appears. A plain reading of sub-
section (3)(c) shows that "profits from such exports" has to be
profits from exports of self-manufactured goods plus profits from
exports of trading goods. The profit is to be calculated in the
manner laid down in Sections (3)(c)(i) and (ii). The opening words
"profit derived from such exports" together with the word "and"
clearly indicate that the profits have to be calculated by counting
both the exports. It is clear from a reading of sub-section (1) of
Section 80-HHC(3) that a deduction can be permitted only if there is
a positive profit in the exports of both self-manufactured goods as
well as trading goods. If there is a loss in either of the two then that
loss has to be taken into account for the purposes of computing
profits.
8. Under Section 80-HHC(1), the deduction is to be given in
computing the total income of the assessee. In computing the total
income of the assessee both profits as well as losses will have to be
taken into consideration. Section 80-AB is relevant. It reads as
follows:
"80-AB. Where any deduction is required
to be made or allowed under any section
included in this Chapter under the heading
’C’. Deductions in respect of certain incomes
in respect of any income of the nature specified
in that section which is included in the gross
total income of the assessee, then,
notwithstanding anything contained in that
section, for the purpose of computing the
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 7
deduction under that section, the amount of
income of that nature as computed in
accordance with the provision of this Act
(before making any deduction under this
Chapter) shall alone be deemed to be the
amount of income of that nature which is
derived or received by the assessee and which
is included in his gross total income."
(emphasis in original)
9. Section 80-B(5) is also relevant. Section 80-B(5) provides that
"gross total income" means total income computed in accordance
with the provisions of the Income Tax Act.
10. Section 80-AB is also in Chapter VI-A. It starts with the words
"where any deduction is required to be made or allowed under any
section included in this Chapter". This would include Section 80-
HHC. Section 80-AB further provides that "notwithstanding
anything contained in that section". Thus Section 80-AB has been
given an overriding effect over all other sections in Chapter VI-A.
Section 80-HHC does not provide that its provisions are to prevail
over Section 80-AB or over any other provision of the Act. Section
80-HHC would thus be governed by Section 80-AB. Decisions of
the Bombay High Court in CIT v. Shirke Construction Equipment
Ltd. (2000 (246) ITR 429) and the Kerala High Court in CIT v. T.C.
Usha (2003 (132) Taxman 297) to the contrary cannot be said to be
the correct law. Section 80-AB makes it clear that the computation
of income has to be in accordance with the provisions of the Act. If
the income has to be computed in accordance with the provisions of
the Act, then not only profits but also losses have to be taken into
consideration.
11. Even under Section 80-HHC (3) (c) (i) the profit is to be
adjusted profit of business. The adjusted profit of the business
means a profit as reduced by the profit derived from business of
exports out of India of trading goods. Thus in calculating the
profits under sub-section (3)(c)(i) one necessarily has to reduce
profits under sub-section (3)(c)(ii). As seen above, the term "profit"
means positive profit. Thus if there is loss then those losses in
export of trading goods have to be adjusted. They cannot be
ignored. A plain reading of Section 80-HHC makes it clear that in
arriving at profits earned from export of both self-manufactured
goods and trading goods, the profits and losses in both the trades
have to be taken into consideration. If after such adjustments there
is a positive profit, the assessee would be entitled to deduction
under Section 80-HHC(1). If there is a loss he will not be entitled to
any deduction.
12. It was submitted that the word "profit" in Section 80-HHC
must have the same meaning in the entire section, and that as the
word profit in Section 80-HHC(1) means only positive profit, it will
have the same meaning in Section 80-HHC(3)(c). It is submitted
that thus the word profit in Section 80-HHC(3)(c) would not include
losses and if there are any losses, they are to be ignored. The plea
is clearly without substance. Firstly, it is not necessary that the
word "profit" must have the same meaning. The meaning of the
word "profit" will depend on the context in which it is used. In
Section 80-HHC (1) it is admittedly used to indicate positive "profit"
because the deduction will only be of a positive profit. Section 80-
HHC(3) is the sub-section which provides how profits are to be
worked out in computing total income. For purposes of such
computation both profits and losses have to be taken into account.
Thus the word "profit" in Section 80-HHC(3) will mean profits after
taking into account losses, if any. More importantly, in our view,
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 7
the term "profit" in Section 80-HHC both in sub-section (1) and in
sub-section (3) means a positive profit worked out after taking into
consideration the losses, if any. Thus the word "profit" has the
same meaning in Sections 80-HHC(1) and (3).
13. In IPCA Laboratory Ltd. Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Mumbai, (2004) 12 SCC 742), after analyzing the position in the
manner done above, it was held that the profit as contemplated
under Section 80-HHC (1) and Section 80-HHC (3) means positive
profit. Said view was reiterated in Income Tax Officer, Bangalore
Vs. Induflex Products (P) Ltd., (2006 (1) SCC 458). We are in
respectful agreement with the view.
14. Above being the position, there is no merit in this appeal and
is dismissed accordingly with no order as to costs.