Tribunal: Write-back of liabilities not to reduce profit for section 32AB

The Tribunal ruled that the write-back of provisions for ascertained liabilities should not be reduced from the profit computed for section 32AB purposes. The term "ascertained liabilities" is relevant for both additions and reductions in profit computation under section 32AB. The matter was then referred back to the Division Bench for disposal of other grounds raised in the appeal.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Whether amounts withdrawn from reserves or provisions and credited to the profit and loss account should be reduced from the profit computed for section 32AB purposes.
2. Relevance of ascertained liabilities in the context of section 32AB for both addition and reduction of profits.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Whether amounts withdrawn from reserves or provisions and credited to the profit and loss account should be reduced from the profit computed for section 32AB purposes.

The assessee, a limited company engaged in manufacturing plywood and particle boards, had written back provisions for excise duty and differential royalty, which were no longer necessary due to retrospective amendments and modifications by the government. These write-backs were credited to the profit and loss account, and the assessee treated them as part of its profit for the year, claiming relief under section 32AB of the Income-tax Act. However, the Assessing Officer excluded these amounts while computing the allowable deduction under section 32AB, reducing the profit accordingly.

The Tribunal examined the provisions of section 32AB(3), which defines the profits of business or profession for the purposes of sub-section (1) of section 32AB. The profits are to be computed in accordance with the requirements of Parts II and III of Schedule VI to the Companies Act, 1956, and adjusted by adding back certain items and reducing by amounts withdrawn from reserves or provisions if credited to the profit and loss account.

The Tribunal noted that the term "ascertained liabilities" is used in clause (v) of section 32AB(3) for additions but not explicitly for reductions. However, it emphasized that the provisions and reserves are terms of accountancy defined in Part III of Schedule VI to the Companies Act. The Tribunal concluded that provisions for ascertained liabilities, when written back, should not be reduced from the profit computed for section 32AB purposes, as they are part of the business profits and not reserves or provisions in the nature of reserves.

2. Relevance of ascertained liabilities in the context of section 32AB for both addition and reduction of profits.

The Tribunal discussed the nature of reserves and provisions, distinguishing between those for ascertained liabilities and those for unascertained liabilities. It referred to the Supreme Court's decision in Vazir Sultan Tobacco Co. Ltd. v. CIT, which clarified that a provision for ascertained liabilities is a charge against profits, whereas a reserve is an appropriation of profits.

The Tribunal emphasized that the write-back of provisions for ascertained liabilities, such as the excise duty and differential royalty in this case, should not be treated as reserves or provisions to be reduced under section 32AB(3). These amounts, when written back, are part of the business profits and should not reduce the profit for section 32AB purposes.

The Tribunal also referred to relevant case laws, including the decisions of the Supreme Court in Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. CIT and the Madras High Court in CIT v. Tamil Nadu Mercantile Bank Ltd., which supported the view that the computation of profits for section 32AB should be based on commercial profits as per the Companies Act, not the Income-tax Act.

In conclusion, the Tribunal held that the term "ascertained liabilities" in clause (v) of section 32AB(3) is relevant for both additions and reductions. The write-back of provisions for ascertained liabilities should not be reduced from the profit for section 32AB purposes, aligning with the objective of ensuring uniformity and reducing uncertainty in profit computation under this section.

Conclusion
The Tribunal ruled that the write-back of provisions for ascertained liabilities should not be reduced from the profit computed for section 32AB purposes. The term "ascertained liabilities" is relevant for both additions and reductions in profit computation under section 32AB. The matter was then referred back to the Division Bench for disposal of other grounds raised in the appeal.

---