AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) 
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter. 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2008 (12) TMI 260
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., which reads as under:- 1. Whether the Assessing Officer is right in levying the interest under section 234D of the Income-tax Act amounting to Rs. 3.67 lakhs for the assessment year 2001-02, when the section itself came into force only from 1-6-2003. 2. Whether the Assessing Officer is right in levying the interest under section 234D of the Income-tax Act amounting to Rs. 3.67 lakhs when the intimation order under section 143(1) has been passed on 28-2-2003, but the section itself came into force only from 1-6-2003. 4. First of all, we would like to take up the additional ground. 5. After hearing both the parties, the additional grounds have been admitted by us for adjudication in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1998] 229 ITR 383 because the same involves legal issue. 6. After considering the rival submissions we find that identical issue has been decided recently by the Delhi Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ITO v. Ekta Promoters (P.) Ltd. [2008] 113 ITD 719. The Special Bench vide para 71 of the above order has held that:- "71. In view of the above discussion our answer to que....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rties we find that the assessee had claimed a sum of Rs. 74,10,321 towards consultancy fee for redesigning the entire supply chain management. The Assessing Officer held that this expenditure was in the nature of capital expenditure. He further noticed that only a sum of Rs. 11,46,432 was claimed in the books of account and the balance was treated as deferred expenditure. Accordingly, he disallowed a sum of Rs. 62,63,889 being in the nature of capital expenditure. This addition has been confirmed by CIT (Appeals). 11. Before us, the learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that expenditure incurred for consultancy for obtaining some management reports cannot be regarded as capital expenditure and in this regard he relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Crompton Engg. Co. Ltd. [2000] 242 ITR 317 (Mad.). He submitted that it does not make a difference whether the assessee had treated the same as deferred expenditure in its own books of account. In this regard he relied on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 363. 12. The ld. Departmental Representative, on the othe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....owed in respect of balance export sales in terms of sub-section (4) of section 10B of the Act. 16. The ld. Departmental Representative submitted that the principles laid down in the case of Lakshmi Machine Works are only for the purpose of deduction under section 80HHC and the same could not be applied here. He submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Chowringhee Sales Bureau (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [1973] 87 ITR 542, has clearly held that Sales Tax is part of the trading receipts. He further submitted that the language of section 10B is clear and deduction can be allowed only if the assessee was owning 100 per cent export oriented unit. Once this condition is not fulfilled then no deduction can be allowed for even export turnover. He argued that though in this year there was a provision showing that even if the assessee has some domestic turnover, deduction has to be given under section 10B of the Act, but the second proviso prescribes the limit for domestic sales at 25 per cent and, therefore, the assessee is not entitled to deduction under section 10B of the Act. 17. In the rejoinder, the learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that in this year the second provi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ea. Therefore, Government extended the benefit given under section 10B of the Act by inserting this proviso. A further reading of the proviso would make it clear that if the domestic tariff area sales were less than 25 per cent then 100 per cent deduction was allowable, i.e., even if the assessee was selling some of the goods in domestic area, still he was eligible for 100 per cent deduction. 19. Sub-section (4) of section 10B of the Income-tax Act which was substituted by Finance Act, 2001 with effect from 1-4-2001. This means that during the assessment year 2001-02 the assessee was entitled to the benefit under sub-section (4) on proportionate sales. Perhaps, Government, realised that this was double benefit and that is why the second proviso was omitted by Finance Act, 2001, with effect from 1-4-2002. In this year, therefore, both the possibilities are there. At this stage, we would like to observe the general rule of interpretation in respect of the Statute where there are conflicting provisions which is known as Doctrine of Harmonious Construction is inapplicable. This rule clearly states that a Statute has to be interpreted in such a way that effect is given to all the pro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of book profits. For example, commission, interest etc., do form part of the profit and loss account but for the purposes of calculation of profits derived from local sales and exports, they stand excluded. The difficulty arises because the formula is based on the hybrid system of profits, namely, actual and statutory profits. Therefore, this judgment should be read in the context of the above parameters. Our reasoning in this judgment is confined to the workability of the formula in section 80HHC(3) of the Act as it stood at the material time." From the above it is clear that this decision was rendered only for the purpose of finding out the proportionate profit under section 80HHC(3) of the Act. Otherwise, the law is very clear that Excise Duty and Sales Tax are part of the trading turnover and this view has already been confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Chowringhee Sales Bureau (P.) Ltd. In view of this decision we are of the view that Excise Duty has to be included in the domestic sales to find out the value of domestic sales. After inclusion of such Excise Duty in the domestic sales the proportion comes to 28.8 per cent and, therefore, the second proviso....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssue against the revenue. Second Issue 25. After hearing both the parties, we find that this issue is squarely covered against the revenue by the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lakshmi Machine Works, wherein it was held that:- "The principal reason for enacting a formula in section 80HHC of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is to disallow a part of the concession thereunder when the entire deduction claimed cannot be regarded as relating to exports. Therefore, while interpreting the words "total turnover" in the formula in section 80HHC one has to give a schematic interpretation. The various amendments made therein show that receipts by way of brokerage, commission, interest, rent, etc., do not form part of business profits as they have no nexus with the activity of export. The amendments made from time to time indicate that they became necessary in order to make the formula workable. If so, excise duty and sales tax also cannot form part of the "total turnover" under section 80HHC(3): Otherwise, the formula becomes unworkable." Same view has been taken by the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. Sundaram Clayton Ltd. [2006] 281 ITR 425. Respect....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed Brother in these two cross appeals. After giving my deep thought on all the issues, reasoning and conclusion of Learned Accountant Member, I concur and agree with the reasoning and conclusions with respect to all other issues in these cross appeals except for issue No. 4 in assessee's appeal. In the assessee's appeal in ITA No. 12/06 I do not agree with the reasons and conclusion of my learned brother regarding the issue whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the assessee is entitled for the claim of exemption under section 10B of Income-tax Act. The relevant brief facts have already been narrated in the proposed order of the learned Accountant Member. Therefore the same need not be repeated herein. However, I would refer the relevant facts wherever necessary at appropriate stage/place in my order. 32. The entire dispute regarding this issue revolves and pertains to the meaning and interpretation of section 10B(1); 2nd proviso to section 10B(1) and sub-section (4) to section 10B as existed in the relevant assessment year 2001-02. The assessee is a 100 per cent export oriented undertaking ('EOU' for short). During the period relevant to the assessment year the EOU ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....-4-2002. By virtue of introduction of second proviso, sub-section (1) of section 10B was diluted for one year by this deeming provision. This means that if the profits and gains of EOU includes profits and gains from domestic sale then profits and gains derived from domestic sale to the extent of 25 per cent of total sale shall be deemed to be the profits and gains derived from export of such goods only for one year during which the deeming provision in the shape of second proviso remained on the statute. There is no provision which allows the domestic sale by the EOU and thereby in case of any sale by the EOU of more than 25 per cent of the total sale for the assessment year 2001-02 and any domestic sale for the other assessment year will disentitle the EOU for relief under section 10B. As far as sub-section (4) of section 10B is concerned in my view the same is only a machinery provision which facilitates the computation of profits and gains from export of goods in proportion to export turnover in respect of such goods and total turnover of the business carried on by the undertaking. From sub-section (4) it cannot be inferred that the words export turnover and total turnover refe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fective, harmonious and sensible. The words of the statute are to be understood in the sense in which they are best harmonious with the object and the Legislature's view. The taxing statute is to be strictly construed. In case of a taxation statute it is not permitted to stretch or strain its language in order to apply to a particular case. 36. In view of the above discussion, I am of the considered opinion that when the assessee (EOU) had domestic sale of more than 25 per cent of the total sale during the period relevant to the assessment year 2001-02 the assessee is not entitled for exemption under section 10B of the Act. The second proviso to sub-section (1) prescribes the limit for domestic sale if any and the same will be deemed as export sales and the profits and gains of the domestic sale shall be deemed as profits and gains of the export sale. Apart from this proviso, there is no other provision to enable the assessee for claiming the exemption if the total sale of the assessee (EOU) includes the domestic sale. Sub-section (4) to section 10B talks about the export turnover and total turnover which does not mean that the total turnover includes the domestic sale. When cla....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bsp; ---------------- Total deduction claimed under section 10B Rs. 2,88,84,327 ---------------- Hundred per cent export-oriented units get special treatment by virtue of the fact that they export their entire products. However, in order to provide economic flexibility to them and allow them to dispose of the export-rejects and byproducts they were allowed to sell 25 per cent of the entire products in the domestic market. In the facts of the present case I find that the export-oriented unit of the assessee had domestic sale to the extent of 28.8 per cent as computed by the Assessing Officer. As such claim of deduction on domestic sales amounting to Rs. 68,83,343 was denied to the assessee. On that there is no difference of opinion. 3. The difference crept on the question th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....p; Total turnover The export turnover and the total turnover for the purposes of section 10B shall be of the hundred per cent export-oriented undertaking and this shall not have any material relationship with the other business of the assessee outside the unit for the purpose of this provision. 6. Profit of domestic sales if it is within the limits of 25 per cent is deemed as profit of export for the purpose of computation of deduction under section 10B. This amount is worked out separately on a proportionate basis and added to the amount of export profits. The relief available on export profit rests on the bedrock of the eligibility criteria laid down under section 10B(1). If the assessee derives profits and gains from hundred per cent export-oriented undertaking from the export of articles or things it can claim the benefit of section 10B. The second proviso is an additional incentive which has been granted to the assessee to provide economic flexibility and to allow it to dispose of the export-rejects and byproducts, etc. This proviso in no way governs the eligibility criteria. The eligibility conditions for getting the deduction under section 10B is enshr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er. To find out the export profits the profits of the business must be multiplied by export turnover and divided by the total turnover. If we take the interpretation that the benefit of section 10B is not available in the eventuality of domestic sales then the provisions of section 10B(4) would become otiose. It is the cardinal principle of law that there is nothing superfluous in the statute. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Distributors (Baroda) (P) Ltd. [1972] 83 ITR 377 has held that no part of a provision of a statute can be just ignored by saying that the Legislature enacted it not knowing what it was saying. Where an expression is used by the Legislature the court must assume that the Legislature deliberately used that expression and that it intended to convey some meaning thereby. In my humble opinion the second proviso to section 10B(1) cannot be construed to be a qualifying condition for claiming deduction. It just permits additional benefit which may be allowed provided domestic profit is within the limit prescribed in the proviso. On the panoply of this proviso deduction cannot be denied. The assessee would be entitled to partial deduction proportionately....