No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE
Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL & SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY
आदेश / ORDER PER R.S. SYAL, VP : These two appeals by the assessee arise out of the separate orders dated 27-07-2017 & 13-12-2017 passed by the CIT(A)-1, Pune in relation to the assessment years 2013-14 & 2014-15. Since both the appeals have some commonality of facts, we have ergo clubbed them for disposal by this consolidated order. 2. The appeal for the A.Y. 2013-14 is time barred by 128 days. The assessee has filed an affidavit indicating reasons for the
2 ITA Nos.400 & 668/PUN/2018 M/s. Chheda Electricals and Electronics Pvt. Ltd.,
belated filing of the appeal. We are satisfied with such reasons.
The delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted for hearing.
The only issue raised by the assessee in its appeal is against
restricting the deduction u/s.80IC of the Income-tax Act, 1961
(hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) on the profits of Roorkee
undertaking to Rs.3,11,49,011/- instead of profits from eligible
undertaking at Rs.7,57,11,731/-.
Succinctly, the facts of the case are that the assessee is
engaged in manufacture of Auto Electrical and Electronics
components for two and three wheelers. Return of income was
filed on 30-11-2013 declaring total income under normal
computation at Nil. In such computation, the assessee claimed
deduction u/s.80IC of the Act amounting to Rs.3,11,49,011/- from
the gross total income of Rs.3,11,49,011/-. The Assessing Officer
(AO) observed that the assessee was having two plants located at
Pune and Roorkee in Uttarakhand. There was profit of Rs.7.57
crore in the eligible Roorkee unit and loss of Rs.4.26 crore in
Shirwal, non-eligible unit. The assessee claimed that the entire
profit from Shirwal unit was eligible for deduction u/s.80IC of the
Act. The AO noticed that the gross total income of the assessee
3 ITA Nos.400 & 668/PUN/2018 M/s. Chheda Electricals and Electronics Pvt. Ltd.,
was only to the tune of Rs.3,11,49,011/- and hence, the amount of
deduction u/s.80IC r.w.s. 80A(2) was to be restricted to that level.
The ld. CIT(A) countenanced the decision of the AO, against
which the assessee has approached the Tribunal.
We have heard both the sides and gone through the relevant
material on record. In the computation of total income under
normal provisions, the assessee computed gross total income at
Rs.3.30 crore. Thereafter, deduction was claimed u/s.80IC
amounting to Rs.7.57 crore. The view point of the authorities on
this issue is that deduction u/s.80IC is required to be restricted to
the amount of `gross total income’ of Rs.3.11 crore and odd.
Chapter VIA of the Act deals with the deductions to be made in
computing the total income. Section 80A(1) provides that: “In
computing the total income of an assessee, there shall be allowed
from his gross total income, in accordance with and subject to the
provisions of this Chapter, the deductions specified in sections
80C to 80U”. Sub-section (2) of section 80A provides that: “The
aggregate amount of the deductions under this Chapter shall not,
in any case, exceed the gross total income of the assessee”. The
term “gross total income” has been defined in section 80B(5) to
4 ITA Nos.400 & 668/PUN/2018 M/s. Chheda Electricals and Electronics Pvt. Ltd.,
mean: ‘the total income computed in accordance with the
provisions of this Act, before making any deduction under this
Chapter”. On a conjoint reading of the above provisions, it
emerges that the total amount of deductions under the Chapter
VIA cannot breach the amount of gross total income, which, in
turn, means the total income computed in accordance with the
provisions of the Act immediately before making any deductions
under this Chapter. Thus, the procedure is to compute head-wise
income under Chapter IV; club incomes of other persons in the
assessee’s total income as per Chapter V; then apply the
provisions of set off and carry forward as per Chapter VI, so as to
reach the amount of gross total income. To put it simply, the
amount of gross total income is the total income of the assessee
immediately before the claim of deductions under Chapter VIA of
the Act. Going with the prescription of section 80A(2) of the Act,
if the gross total income is more than the aggregate amount of
deductions under Chapter VI-A, then such total amount of
deductions is reduced from it to find out the total income. If
however, the aggregate amount of deductions under this Chapter
happens to be more than the gross total income, then such
5 ITA Nos.400 & 668/PUN/2018 M/s. Chheda Electricals and Electronics Pvt. Ltd.,
aggregate amount of deductions gets restricted to the amount of
the gross total income with the effect that the total income is
reduced to Nil and is not converted into loss so as to allow carry
forward of the amount of deductions under this Chapter to the
next year. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in M/s. Synco Industries
Ltd. Vs. AO and another (2008) 299 ITR 444 (SC) has also laid
down to this extent.
Adverting to the facts of the instant case, it is seen that the
assessee’s final gross total income was Rs.3,11,49,011/-. Thus,
the total amount of deductions under Chapter VI could not have
breached the amount of gross total income. The authorities have
rightly restricted the amount of deduction u/s 80IC to the extent of
gross total income computed at Rs.3.11 crore. The ld. AR was
fair enough to accept this position against the assessee. The
ground is thus dismissed.
The assessee had on an earlier occasion filed application
raising additional ground, which reads as under:
“Appellant contends that Appellant is eligible to claim deduction u/s.80IC of ITA, 1961 while computing book profit u/s.115JB of the ITA, 1961 considering presence of section 115JB(5) and keeping reliance on following decisions :
6 ITA Nos.400 & 668/PUN/2018 M/s. Chheda Electricals and Electronics Pvt. Ltd.,
a) Neha Home Builders Private Limited V. CIT – 195 TTJ 506 (Mumbai) b) CIT V. Metal & Chromium Platers P. Ltd. - 415 ITR 123 (Madras). c) Best Trading & Agencies Ltd. V. DCIT – 119 taxman.com 129 (Karnataka)”.
It has been urged through the additional ground that the
deduction u/s.80IC be allowed in the computation of book profit
u/s.115JB of the Act in the light of sub-section (5) thereto.
Before examining the admissibility or otherwise of the
additional ground, it is relevant to note that the assessee in its
computation of total income under regular provisions determined
total income at Nil. It, being a private limited company, was
governed by the provisions of section 115JB of the Act. Under
the second computation as per this section, the assessee computed
its book profit at Rs.6,90,68,947/- by taking the amount of profit
as per parts II and III of Schedule VI to the Companies Act at
Rs.5.46 crore as added by the amount of Income-tax u/s.40(a)(ii)
and Deferred tax liability. Thereafter, tax was calculated at
18.50% on the book profit of Rs.6.90 crore and the assessee
paid/adjusted the amount of tax due thereon at Rs.1,38,19,147/-.
The contention of the assessee is that in the computation of book
7 ITA Nos.400 & 668/PUN/2018 M/s. Chheda Electricals and Electronics Pvt. Ltd.,
profit u/s.115JB, it did not reduce the amount of deduction
u/s.80IC at Rs.7.57 crore which ought to have been reduced in
terms of sub-section (5) of section 115JB of the Act. It is
apparent from the above discussion that the assessee suo motu
applied the provisions of section 115JB of the Act and rightly so.
Now, the claim through the additional ground is that the amount
of book profit computed for paying tax u/s.115JB was wrongly
computed which ought to have been reduced by the amount of
deduction u/s.80IC of the Act. The subject matter of the
additional ground goes to the root of the matter and is decisive of
the total tax liability of the assessee. This being a legal issue, the
relevant facts of which are already on record, involves
adjudication on question of law. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in
National Thermal Power Company Ltd. Vs. CIT (1998) 229 ITR
383 (SC) has observed that: “the purpose of the assessment
proceedings before the taxing authorities is to assess correctly the
tax liability of an assessee in accordance with law. If, for
example, as a result of a judicial decision given while the appeal
is pending before the Tribunal, it is found that a non-taxable item
is taxed or a permissible deduction is denied, we do not see any
8 ITA Nos.400 & 668/PUN/2018 M/s. Chheda Electricals and Electronics Pvt. Ltd.,
reason why the assessee should be prevented from raising that
question before the tribunal for the first time, so long as the
relevant facts are on record in respect of that item”. Answering
the question posed before it in affirmative, their Lordships held
that on the facts found by the authorities below a question of law
arises (though not raised before the authorities) which bears on
the tax liability of the assessee and the Tribunal has jurisdiction to
examine the same. We find that the additional ground raised
before the Tribunal involves a pure question of law and no fresh
investigation of facts is necessary for its determination. As such,
the additional ground is admitted and espoused for disposal on
merits.
We have heard the rival submissions on the additional
ground and gone through the relevant material on record. Section
115JB of the Act is a special provision for payment of tax by
certain companies. Sub-section (1) of section 115JB provides
that: `Notwithstanding anything contained in any other provision
of this Act, where in the case of an assessee, being a company, the
income-tax, payable on the total income as computed under this
Act in respect of any previous year relevant to the assessment
9 ITA Nos.400 & 668/PUN/2018 M/s. Chheda Electricals and Electronics Pvt. Ltd.,
year commencing on or after the 1st day of April, 2012, is less
than eighteen and one-half per cent of its book profit, such book
profit shall be deemed to be the total income of the assessee and
the tax payable by the assessee on such total income shall be the
amount of income-tax at the rate of eighteen and one-half per
cent’. A careful circumspection of this sub-section transpires that
it opens with a non obstante clause and is also a deeming
provision. It provides a mechanism for determination of income
tax payable by a company at 18.5% of its book profit, if, the
amount of income tax payable under the normal provisions is less
than that. When that happens, two consequences result. Firstly, its
book profit is deemed as total income and secondly, such deemed
total income is subjected to tax at 18.5%. Because of the non-
obstante clause, no other provision of the Act can apply and come
in the way of the manner of determination of these two things,
namely, either the book profit (total income) or the rate at which
the tax is payable. The term `book profit’, as referred to in sub-
section (1), has been precisely defined in an exhaustive manner in
Explanation 1 to sub-section (2). It provides that: `For the
purposes of this section, "book profit" means the profit as shown
10 ITA Nos.400 & 668/PUN/2018 M/s. Chheda Electricals and Electronics Pvt. Ltd.,
in the statement of profit and loss …’ as increased by items given
in clauses (a) to (k) and as reduced by, items given in clauses (i)
to (viii). The list of reductions does not include the amount of
deduction u/s.80IC etc., though there is reference for reduction of
the income u/s.10, 11 and 12 etc. under clause (ii).
At this juncture, it is relevant to mention that section 115JA,
predecessor of section 115JB, defined the term `book profit’
under Explanation to sub-section (2) of section 115JA expressly
providing for reducing the amount of deductions u/ss.80IB, 80IA,
80HHC and 80HHE in clauses (v), (vi), (viii) and (ix) in addition
to exemptions u/ss.10 to 12 as per clause (ii). However, the rate
of tax u/s.115JA was 30% of its book-profit. When section
115JB was inserted, it did away with specific deductions, such as,
sections 80IB, 80IA, 80HHC and 80HHE which were there
u/s.115JA but retained the exemptions u/ss.10 to 12 for the
purposes of determination of book-profit. The list of reductions
was curtailed in view of the slashing of the rate of tax to 18.50%
payable on the amount of book profit as against the earlier rate of
30%. This deciphers that in the computation of income-tax
payable u/s.115JB, the statute has not provided for reducing the
11 ITA Nos.400 & 668/PUN/2018 M/s. Chheda Electricals and Electronics Pvt. Ltd.,
amount of book profit with the amount of deductions under
Chapter VIA which includes section 80IC also. Since the term
`book profit’ has been defined in an exhaustive manner and sub-
section (1) provides for charging tax at 18.5% by deeming such
book profit as total income and further this is locked with the non-
obstante clause in sub-section (1) qua any other provision of the
Act, the sequitur is that determination of tax liability by applying
the specified rate on the book profit of a company attains finality
in this manner alone and cannot be subjected to any other
provision of the Act insofar as these two aspects of book profit
and the rate to be applied thereon are concerned.
The ld. AR has invoked the provisions of sub-section (5) of
section 115JB for claiming reduction in the amount of book profit
on account of amount of deduction u/s.80IC. Sub-section (5)
provides: “Save as otherwise provided in this section, all other
provisions of this Act shall apply to every assessee, being a
company, mentioned in this section”. The salient features of this
sub-section are that it opens with a saving clause qua section
115JB and then proceeds to provide that all other provisions of
this Act shall apply. The effect of the saving clause is that
12 ITA Nos.400 & 668/PUN/2018 M/s. Chheda Electricals and Electronics Pvt. Ltd.,
whatsoever has been enshrined in section 115JB will be secured
and protected. In that view of the matter, it is strictly
impermissible to go beyond the prescription of the definition of
book profit and suo motu import or export certain increases or
reductions as have not been expressly provided therein. The use
of the word `other’ in the expression `all other provisions’
reinforces that the mandate of section 115JB will remain
undisturbed by sub-section (5) and only the provisions, other than
section 115JB, which shall apply.
The reference to all other provisions is to the provisions -
ante or post the computation of tax liability in the fashion as
prescribed in section 115JB. To clarify, the assessee would be
liable to pay advance tax with reference to the prescribed rate of
tax on such book profit deemed as total income and if such
advance tax is not paid, it will be visited with interest u/s 234B
and 234C; similarly if the return is not furnished in time, it will be
liable to pay interest u/s 234A for default in furnishing the return
of income. Thus, by no stretch of imagination, sub-section (5) can
have the effect of upsetting anything which is the subject matter
of section 115JB, including the book profit, which got locked by
13 ITA Nos.400 & 668/PUN/2018 M/s. Chheda Electricals and Electronics Pvt. Ltd.,
virtue of sub-section (1) read with Explanation 1 to section 115JB
because of non obstante clause and got double locked by having
saving clause qua the entire section 115JB in sub-section (5). The
contention of the ld. AR would have merited acceptance if the
subject matter of sub-section (5) de hors its saving clause,
namely, applicability of all other provisions of the Act, had been
placed in Explanation (1) to section 115JB(2).
The amount of book profit and the determination of income-
tax liability thereon as per sub-section (1) attains finality on its
computation itself and hence, that cannot be subjected to other
provisions of the Act including the deduction u/s.80IC of the Act.
The very fact that Explanation 2 to section 115JB specifically
provides for the reduction of the amount of income u/ss.10,11 and
12 etc., itself evidences that the intention of the legislature is to
allow reduction from the book profits only to this extent and not
to deduction u/s 80IC of the Act. If the contention of the ld. AR
about the applicability of sub-section (5) also to the determination
of book profit in sub-section (1) of section 115JB is taken to a
logical conclusion and it is supposed that the legislature intended
granting benefit of all the deductions in the computation of book
14 ITA Nos.400 & 668/PUN/2018 M/s. Chheda Electricals and Electronics Pvt. Ltd.,
profit also u/s.115JB, then there was no need to specifically retain
clause (ii) to Explanation 1 providing for reduction of the income
u/ss.10, 11 and 12 from the amount of profit as per the profit and
loss account. In that case, sub-section (5) would have also
governed sections 10, 11 and 12, thereby rendering this clause
redundant. The presence of clause (ii) in Explanation 1 to section
115JB and omission of other clauses which were there in section
115JA providing for reducing some of the deductions under
Chapter VI-A, clearly shows that the intention of the legislature is
to continue with the reduction of income u/ss. 10 to 12 in the era
of section 115JB and omit the reduction of some of the deductions
under Chapter VIA in the computation of book profit.
Now we turn to the decisions relied by the ld. AR in support
of the applicability of sub-section (5) to the computation of `book
profit’ u/s.115JB of the Act with the consequence of reducing the
amount of deduction u/s 80IC of the Act therefrom. The first
decision is that of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in Best
Trading & Agencies Ltd. V. DCIT – 119 taxman.com 129
(Karnataka) in which the issue was about providing the benefit of
indexation to the cost of acquisition while computing the capital
15 ITA Nos.400 & 668/PUN/2018 M/s. Chheda Electricals and Electronics Pvt. Ltd.,
gain for the purpose of computation of book profit u/s.115JB of
the Act. Taking note of sub-section (5) of section 115JB, the
Hon’ble High Court granted the benefit of indexation even though
such indexation has not been provided for in Explanation 1 to
section 115JB of the Act. The next judgment is that of the
Hon’ble Madras High Court in CIT Vs. Metal & Chromium
Plater (P) Ltd. (2016) 76 taxman.com 229 (Madras). The issue in
that case was about granting of relief u/s.54EC in the computation
of tax u/s.115JB which is otherwise not provided for in
Explanation to section 115JB(1). The Hon’ble High Court
invoked sub-section (5) and held that the adjusted book profit
would be further eligible to the benefits set out in other provisions
of the Act including section 54EC of the Act. The third decision
is of the Mumbai Tribunal in Neha Home Builders (2018) 54
CCH 0577 MumTrib holding that the assessee was entitled to
deduction u/s 80IB(10) while computing book profit u/s 115JB of
the Act in the light of sub-section (5).
During the course of hearing, our attention was drawn
towards some other judgments, inter alia, Sankhla Polymers (P)
Ltd. Vs. ITO (2013) 352 ITR 452 (Karnataka), and Jaintia Alloys
16 ITA Nos.400 & 668/PUN/2018 M/s. Chheda Electricals and Electronics Pvt. Ltd.,
(P) Ltd. and others Vs. Union of India and others (2010) 320 ITR
442 (Guwahati) having bearing on the issue under consideration.
In the case of Jaintia Alloys (P) Ltd. (supra), the assessee
filed writ petition challenging the validity of the provisions of
section 115JB of the Act on the ground that it did not provide for
deduction u/s.80IB and the assessee had set up its unit in the
eligible area for availing benefit u/s.80IB. Dismissing the writ
petition, the Hon’ble High Court held that the curtailment of the
benefit earlier granted by legislative Act cannot be invalidated on
the principles of promissory estoppel. In other words, the benefit
of section us.80IB which was available u/s.115JA but taken away
by section 115JB, was declared as valid. In Sankhla Polymers (P)
Ltd. (supra), the assessee claimed deduction u/s.80IB in the
computation of income u/s.115JB, which was not allowed by the
AO and the action of the AO was approved in the consecutive two
appeals. The Hon’ble High Court, on a comparative reading of
section 80IB as well as section 115JB, held that section 115JB is
a special charging section and section 80-IB does not control the
provisions of Section 115JB of the Act. It further laid down that:
`The benefit under Section 80-IB is not denied, it works as it is. It
17 ITA Nos.400 & 668/PUN/2018 M/s. Chheda Electricals and Electronics Pvt. Ltd.,
is only because the assessee happens to be a company to which
the provisions of Section 115JB is also attracted, levy as indicated
therein becomes operative’. Similar view was earlier taken by the
Hon’ble Uttarakhand High Court in Sidcul Industrial Association
vs. State of Uttrakhand (2011) 331 ITR 491. These judgments
make it palpable that deduction u/s.80B/80IC is not available in
the computation of book-profit u/s.115JB of the Act.
In view of the foregoing discussion, it is clear that for the
purpose of calculation of tax liability u/s.115JB of the Act, there
is no scope for reducing book profit by the amount of deduction
u/s.80IC. The Mumbai Tribunal in Neha Home Builders (supra)
has held that deduction u/s.80IC is permissible in computing book
profit u/s.115JB of the Act. Unfortunately, the above referred
judgments of the Hon’ble Guwahati, Uttarakhand and Karnataka
High Courts, which were prevailing on the date of hearing by the
Mumbai Bench, were not brought to its notice.
At this stage it would be relevant to take note of another
judgment of the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in Bishnu Krishna
Shrestha vs. CIT (2019) 414 ITR 405 (Raj). The assessee in that
case challenged the provisions of Section 115JB & 80IC of the
18 ITA Nos.400 & 668/PUN/2018 M/s. Chheda Electricals and Electronics Pvt. Ltd.,
Act on the ground that the benefit granted under Section 80IC
could not have been withdrawn by introduction of section 115JB.
Thus the dispute was on the non-granting of deduction u/s 80IC in
the computation of tax liability u/s 115JB. Contention of the
assessee that the denial of the deduction was ultra vires the
Constitution of India came to be rejected. Although the SLP on
this issue has been admitted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in
S.B.L. (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT (2019) 263 Taxman 477 (SC), but that
does neither make the ratio of the judgment otiose nor accord
such admission a status of binding precedent under Article 141 of
the Constitution. Ratio of the judgment in such cases continues to
have full force under Article 227 of the Constitution until it is
actually reversed and not on admission of the SLP.
In view of the fact that four consecutive High Courts have
disentitled the assesses to reduce the amount of deduction
u/s.80IB/80IC in the computation of book-profit u/s.115JB of the
Act, and not even a single divergent judgment of any Hon’ble
High Court has been brought to our notice, there is no scope for
taking a contrary view. Ex consequenti, the Tribunal, which is an
inferior authority, is incapacitated to lay down differently.
19 ITA Nos.400 & 668/PUN/2018 M/s. Chheda Electricals and Electronics Pvt. Ltd.,
Reverting to the language of section 115JB(5) making all other
provisions of the Act applicable but by saving section 115JB and
sub-section (1) of section 115JB containing a non obstante clause
qua any other provision of the Act in the manner of computation
of income tax liability of a company at 18.5% of its book profit
and because of deeming provision in this sub-section regarding
the computation of book profit and further Explanation 1
defining book profit in an exhaustive manner, we hold that there
is no merit in the contention of the ld. AR in seeking reduction of
the book profit u/s 115JB with the amount of deduction u/s 80IC
of the Act. The additional ground, therefore, fails.
The ld. AR submitted that the appeal for the A.Y. 2014-15 is
rendered infructuous and the same may be dismissed as such.
In the result, both the appeals are dismissed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 04th May, 2022.
Sd/- Sd/- (PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY) (R.S.SYAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT पुणे Pune; �दनांक Dated : 04th May, 2022 Satish
20 ITA Nos.400 & 668/PUN/2018 M/s. Chheda Electricals and Electronics Pvt. Ltd.,
आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant; 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent; 3. The CIT(A)-1, Pune 4. The Pr.CIT-1, Pune िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे “B” / 5. DR ‘B’, ITAT, Pune गाड� फाईल / Guard file 6.
आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune Date 1. Draft dictated on 02-05-2022 Sr.PS 2. Draft placed before author 04-05-2022 Sr.PS 3. Draft proposed & placed before the JM second member 4. Draft discussed/approved by Second JM Member. 5. Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS Sr.PS 6. Kept for pronouncement on Sr.PS 7. Date of uploading order Sr.PS 8. File sent to the Bench Clerk Sr.PS 9. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk 10. Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11. Date of dispatch of Order.
*