Profits Must Follow Companies Act for Section 32AB Deduction, Not Income Tax Adjustments

The HC held that for claiming the 20% deduction under Section 32AB, profits must be determined as per Parts II and III of Schedule VI of the Companies Act, not adjusted based on Income Tax Act provisions. Deducting additional cane price from profits for computing the Section 32AB benefit was impermissible. The court rejected the Revenue's reliance on a Supreme Court decision unrelated to the issue. The question was answered in favor of the Assessee, confirming that profits finalized under the Companies Act alone are relevant for Section 32AB benefits, and additional sugarcane price paid could not be deducted while calculating such profits.

---

---

ISSUES:

Whether the 20% deduction under Section 32AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is to be computed on profits as reflected in the Profit & Loss Account finalized under Parts II and III of Schedule VI of the Companies Act, 1956, or on profits determined with reference to actual profits under the Income Tax Act.Whether additional sugarcane price paid after finalization of accounts under the Companies Act can be deducted from profits for computing the Section 32AB deduction in the relevant assessment year.Whether the Assessing Officer has jurisdiction to adjust profits computed under the Companies Act by excluding expenditures not debited in the Profit & Loss Account for the purpose of Section 32AB deduction.

RULINGS / HOLDINGS:

The Court held that the profits for the purpose of Section 32AB deduction must be computed "in accordance with the requirements of Parts II and III of Schedule VI to the Companies Act" and not as per the Income Tax Act. The deduction is to be calculated on profits "as reflected in the audited annual accounts."The additional sugarcane price paid after the finalization of accounts under the Companies Act cannot be deducted from profits for computing the Section 32AB benefit in the relevant assessment year, since it was not debited to the Profit & Loss Account prepared under Schedule VI of the Companies Act.The Assessing Officer erred in deducting the additional sugarcane price from the profits computed under the Companies Act for the purpose of Section 32AB, as the provision does not empower the Assessing Officer to re-compute profits beyond the audited accounts maintained under the Companies Act.

RATIONALE:

The Court applied the statutory framework of Section 32AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961, particularly sub-sections (1), (3), and (5), which mandate that the profits for deduction calculation be derived from profits computed in accordance with Parts II and III of Schedule VI to the Companies Act, 1956, adjusted by specified additions and deductions.The Court relied heavily on precedent, including the Karnataka High Court decision in Jindal Aluminium Ltd., which interpreted Section 32AB profits as those reflected in the audited accounts under the Companies Act, and the Supreme Court decision in Apollo Tyres Ltd., which held that the Assessing Officer cannot go behind the profits shown in the Profit and Loss Account maintained under the Companies Act for similar provisions.The Court noted consistent judicial interpretation from various High Courts that Section 32AB does not require profit computation in accordance with the Income Tax Act but strictly as per the Companies Act accounts, rejecting the Revenue's attempt to adjust profits by excluding expenses not debited in those accounts.The Court distinguished judgments cited by the Revenue (e.g., Tasgaon Taluka S.S.K. Ltd. and Parry Agro Industries Ltd.) as dealing with different legal issues not relevant to the interpretation of Section 32AB.The Court recognized the peculiar accounting situation where additional sugarcane price is determined after account finalization and accepted the Assessee's consistent practice of adjusting such expenses in subsequent years, resulting in no revenue loss and maintaining the integrity of the statutory scheme.

---