TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (9) TMI 675
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....provided as an incentive in terms of section 80HHD of the Act, which reads as under : "80HHD. Deduction in respect of earnings in convertible foreign exchange.-(1) Where an assessee, being an Indian company or a person (other than a company) resident in India, is engaged in the business of a hotel (or of a tour operator, approved by the prescribed authority in this behalf of a travel agent, there shall, in accordance with and subject to the provisions of this section, be allowed in computing the total income of the assessee,- (a) for an assessment year beginning on the 1st day of April, 2001, a deduction of a sum equal to the aggregate of- (i) forty per cent. of the profits derived by him from services provided to foreign tourists ; and (ii) so much of the amount not exceeding forty per cent. of the profits referred to in sub-clause (i) as is debited to the profit and loss account of the previous year in respect of which the deduction is to be allowed and credited to a reserve account to be utilised for the purposes of the business of the assessee in the manner laid down in sub-section (4) ; (b) for an assessment year beginning on the 1st day....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uch hotel or as such tour operator during the previous year relevant to any of the said assessment years. (2) This section applies only to services provided to foreign tourists the receipts in relation to which are received in, or brought into, India by the assessee in convertible foreign exchange within a period of six months from the end of the previous year or, within such further period as the competent authority may allow in this behalf. Explanation 1.-For the purposes of this sub-section, any payment received by an assessee engaged in the business of a hotel or of a tour operator or of a travel agent, in Indian currency obtained by conversion of foreign exchange brought into India through an authorised dealer, (from another hotelier, tour operator or travel agent, as the case may be) on behalf of a foreign tourist or group of foreign tourists, shall be deemed to have been received by the assessee in convertible foreign exchange if the person making the payment furnishes to the assessee a certificate specified in sub-section (2A). Explanation 2.-For the purposes of this sub-section, the expression 'competent authority' means the Reserve Bank of India or....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of sub-section (1),- (a) has been utilised for any purpose other than those referred to in sub-section (4), the amount so utilised ; or (b) has not been utilised in the manner specified in sub-section (4), the amount not so utilised, shall be deemed to be the profits,- (i) in a case referred to in clause (a), in the year in which the amount was so utilised ; or (ii) in a case referred to in clause (b), in the year immediately following the period of five years specified in sub-section (4) ; and shall be charged to tax accordingly, (5A) Where any amount credited to the reserve account under clause (b) of sub-section (1) has been utilised for subscription to any equity shares referred to in clause (f) of sub-section (4) and either whole or any part of such equity shares are transferred or converted into money by the assessee at any time within a period of three years from the date of their acquisition, the aggregate amount so utilised in respect of such equity shares shall be deemed to be the profits of the previous year in which the equity shares are transferred or converted into money. Explanation.-A person shall be treated as having acquire....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ity for the growth of tourism in India, as the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, specify ;" 3. While the Assessing Officer as well as the first appellate authority were of the view that in ascertainment of such profits attributable to the receipts in the nature of foreign exchange receipts of the assessee, which had chain of hotels, some of which were eligible and enabled to claim the benefit of section 80HHD of the Act and some of which though had been receiving foreign exchange payments were nevertheless not getting the benefit for not having undergone the procedure in terms of sub-section (2) of section 80HHD of the Act and, therefore, there being a dispute in the manner of ascertainment of the profits attributable to the foreign exchange receipts of the assessee, the assessee's claim that such ascertainment of profits attributable to the foreign exchange receipts should be computed in terms of the formula provided under sub-section (3) can only be with reference to the over all profits earned from such of the hotels which had been qualified and recognized in terms of sub-sections (1) and (2) and that the total pro- fits earned from out of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nce to entry 81 of List I Schedule VII to the Constitution of India and being a piece of legislation for supporting Governmental activities and in turn being dependent on the policies and programs of Government, at a given point of time, may have and also being dependent on meeting the other requirements to support and meeting the other functions of the State which are essential and India being a welfare country, it is also used as a tool for giving the expression to the policies of the Government governing the people. 6. Under the Income-tax Act, 1961, Chapter VI-A was introduced by the Finance Act, 1965, with effect from April 1, 1965, and a mere glance at the various sections contained in Chapter VI-A will reveal to any person that it comprises various sections which are in the nature of incentives and to encourage particular type of activity by an assessee, which if followed would bring down the assessee's tax liability by the mechanism of excluding the amount identified under each section, significance being the tax liability with reference to the total income of the assessee and if such an incentive linked the activity of producing income is to be either exclude or th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e itself, many others were owned by some one else, i.e., the building with its equipment which enabled it to use it as a hotel owned by some one else but the assessee carried on the hotel business in such premises and in turn paid the owner some payment known as royalty on the basis of an agreement entered into with the owner of the building and the assessee for convenience sake categorised such business activity as running under licence of the owners and a third category where the building with equipment was owned and was also supported by the staff of the owner, nevertheless the management of the same was that of the assessee and some of them also carried on the busi- ness under the brand name of the assessee and one common factor which has group running and that they are all described as a group of hotels belonging to the Welcome Group and it is generally made known to the customers/guests that they are receiving hospitality in a Welcome Group Hotel. 11. The list of such hotels as claimed by the assessee for the accounting period relevant for the year 1996-97 is as under : "1. Owned Hotels : Welcomgroup Windsor Manor Sheraton Hotel & Towers, Bangalore &n....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 25,914,326 1,743,690 2,100,430 333,856,838 33,856,838 Travel agents 4,807,232 61,904,823 2,215,158 77,971,784 5,375,815 67,647 10,022,195 1,006,701 163,371,355 163,371,355 Bilateral agreement 0 0 0 0 0 0 Foreign Airlines 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total forex earnings 182,763,544 88,311,228 78,317,420 132,957,950 7,085,117 30,008,100 12,328,427 3,677,536 0 535,449,322 0 535,449,32 13. The assessee had filed its return of income for the assessment year 1996-97 as per its return dated November 28, 1996, disclosing income of Rs. 11,18,37,000. In such return the assessee had claimed a benefit which the assessee can avail of under section 80HHD of the Act to an extent of Rs. 13,54,94,500. 14. The Assessing Officer, after notice to the assessee under section 143(1)(a) of the Act, processed the return and so far as this appeal is concerned our attention being fixed on the amount quantified under section 80HHD and such deduction to the extent of Rs. 13,48,77,185 being allowed by the Assessing Officer. 15. While doing so....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....per quantification entitlement of the assessee in terms of section 80HHD of the Act as such amount played a role in reduction of total taxable income of the assessee by the very amount. 21. While the Assessing Officer was required to examine the matter in terms of the remand of the Appellate Commissioner and in the meanwhile was also of the view that the original assessment order was required to be rectified, caused notice to the assessee under section 154 of the Act as per the notice dated July 7, 2000. 22. The assessee filed its objections/explanation to this notice as per its reply dated September 4, 2000 the relevant portion of which can be seen as extracted in the order of the Assessing Officer and which reads as under : "The assessee is in receipt of the captioned notice whereby it is proposed to rectify the assessment order dated March 31, 1999, under section 143(3) by reducing the deduction of Rs. 13,46,77,185 allowed under section 80HHD of the Income-tax Act ('the Act') to Rs. 8,80,04,548. As per annexure to the said notice, the deduction under section 80HHD is proposed to be computed by apportioning the total profit of the assessee including all the hotel....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in the 'business of a hotel'. . . Approved by the prescribed authority and the deduction is available to the extent of fifty per cent. of the profits derived by such assessee from services provided to foreign tourists and such part of the balance profits as may be utilized in the specified purpose and manner. Since a hotel would be rendering services to persons other foreign tourists, or such services to foreign tourists for which payment is not received in convertible foreign exchange, sub-section (3) lays down an artificial method for determining derived from service provided to foreign tourists. As per this sub-section, profits derived from service provided to foreign tourists shall be that proportion of the profits of 'the business' as the receipts in convertible foreign exchange described in sub-section (2) bear to the total receipts of the business carried on by the assessee. The term 'the business' as appearing in sub-section (3) of section 80HHD refers, in our respectful submission, to the business of a hotel approved by the prescribed authority and not to the aggregate of all business carried on by the assessee. In the present case, the assessee ru....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....correct and in accordance with law. The profit of the hotel business is to be taken as a whole taking the receipts of all the units into consideration and the unit from which there was no income or negative income cannot be ignored. The decisions relied upon the assessee are not applicable to the provisions contained under section 80HHD. The decisions are in respect of other sections such as sections 80HH, 80-I, etc. As such the deduction admissible under section 80HHD is worked out as under : Rs. (i) Total income as per order under section 143(3) 24,32,47,317 Add : On account of capital expenditure as discussed above 27,00,000 24,59,47,317 (ii) Receipts of foreign exchange on account of services rendered to the foreign tourists 53,54,49,322 (iii) Total receipts from business Form 10CCAD 1,46,66,65,995 Income from the head profits and gains of business Receipts in foreign exchange from service provided to foreign tourists Total receipts of business. = Rs. 24,59,47,317 Rs. 53,54,49,322 = Rs. 8,97,90,225 1,46,66,65,995 4. Disallowance on account of fixed assets discarded/ sold-Rs.21,00,915. In the petition dated July 27, 1999, under....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....not been done so while passing the order on remand and the proportionate business profits attributable to the foreign exchange receipts earned by the assessee during the accounting period in question and corresponding assessing year was actually a sum of Rs.8,97,19,225 and not as had been originally allowed at a sum of Rs.13,46,77,185. 26. The actual computation and the method of working of this amount as indicated in the rectification order is as follows : Rs. (i) Total income as per order under section 143(3) 24,32,47,317 Add : On account of capital expenditure as discussed above 27,00,000 24,59,47,317 (ii) Receipts of foreign exchange on account of services rendered to the foreign tourists 53,54,49,322 (iii) Total receipts from business Form 10CCAD 1,46,66,65,995 Income from the head profits and gains of business Receipts in foreign exchange from service provided to foreign tourists Total receipts of business. = Rs. 24,59,47,317 Rs. 53,54,49,322 = Rs. 8,97,90,225 1,46,66,65,995 27. The aggrieved assessee appealed to the Commissioner (Appeals) yet again invoking the appellate remedy under section 246 of the Act, nevertheless did ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....unal on hearing the respective learned counsel for the appellant and the Revenue in terms of its order dated October 31, 2001, allowed the appeal of the assessee being of the view that the contention of the assessee of the merger principle coming in the way of the Assessing Officer to exercise the rectification jurisdiction merits acceptance placing reliance on : "9.(i) It is to he noted that the powers of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) are coterminus with that of the Assessing Officer and traverses the whole assessment. We find support from the decision of the hon'ble apex court in the case of CIT v. Nirbheram Daluram [1997] 224 ITR 610 (SC) in which the above proposition has been laid down. So, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) is deemed to have considered the claim of deduction under section 80HHD of the Act in all its aspects and the order of the Assessing Officer on that issue is to be taken have merged with the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). 9.(ii) In other case, viz., CIT v. Scindia Steam Navigation Co. Ltd. [1961] 42 ITR 589 (SC) the hon'ble Supreme Court has held that when a question is raised, before the Tribunal but fa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion under section 154 of the Act. 31. In so far as the appeal of the assessee relating to the proper manner of working of the benefits under section 80HHD of the Act is concerned the Tribunal opined that while the approval of the prescribed authority is a sine qua non, i.e., entry quantification to get into the provisions of section 80HHD of the Act, the provisions of sub-section (3) of section 80HHD was a machinery provision for effectuating the provisions of section 80HHD the computation section can only quantify what is recognised and provided for in the main provision, i.e., sub-section (1) and for this reason as the benefit of sub-section (1) of section 80HHD is only in respect of hotels approved by the prescribed authority even for the purpose of ascertaining the pro- portionate profit attributable to foreign exchange receipt, the computation should be necessarily with reference to the total receipts of only such hotel which quantifies for the benefit under section 80HHD of the Act and not by including the other hotels which did not quantify for the benefit of section 80HHD, also for claiming the benefit. For arriving at this view sought support from the following de....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....el which did quantify for claiming the benefit and on notice Bay Island Hotel at Port Blair had not been so approved by the prescribed authority. 35. The submission is that in respect of the balance of the claim, the assessee had virtually overlooked the requirements of working of the benefits in terms of sub-section (3) of section 80HHD of the Act and this is a mistake in law and error apparent on the face of the record. Learned counsel would submit that the mistake by the Assessing Officer though is a mistake in law was one of being oblivious to the existence of the statutory provisions of sub-section (3) of section 80HHD. 36. It is, therefore, submitted that it was a clear case qualifying for rectification under section 154 of the Act. 37. Joining issue on the question of rectification jurisdiction being not avail- able as the computation ultimately has been worked by the Assessing Officer and has initially allowed being a debatable point could not be characterized as an error apparent on the face of record and, therefore, could not have been made the subject-matter of section 154 of the Act. Sri Seshachala would submit that the question as to whether the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....merged with this appellate order and, therefore, the principle of merger is not at all attracted in the present case is a subject-matter of the rectification authority to learned counsel for the Revenue. 38. In this regard while our attention is drawn to the statutory provisions of sub-section (1)(a) of section 154 of the Act which reads as under : "154. Rectification of mistake.-(1) With a view to rectifying any mistake apparent from the record an income-tax authority referred to in section 116 may,- (a) amend any order passed by it under the provisions of this Act." 39. Submits on this premise that debate in this question as to whether it can be made subject-matter of order under section 154 is virtually pre-empted by the statutory provisions and it is not taken beyond any scope of such a debate. In support of such submission Sri Seshachala has placed reliance on the decision reported in Addl. CIT v. India Tin Industries P. Ltd. [1987] 166 ITR 454 (Karn) wherein it has been categorically held what was not the subject-matter of appeal before the appellate authority cannot in any way attract the principles of merger of merging that part of the original orde....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....D of the Act. 43. Countering such submissions on behalf of the assessee Sri Vikram H. in the first instance and later carried on by Sri Ajay Vohra, learned counsel appearing for the assessee have put forth several forcible contentions in the following manner. 44. Mr. Vikram in the first instance has contended that invoking of section 154 jurisdiction was erroneous and the jurisdiction was not available to the Assessing Officer as the earlier assessment order of the Assessing Officer had got merged with the appellate order of the first appellate authority. 45. It is, therefore, urged that the Assessing Officer could not have passed an order under section 154 of the Act. For this reason it is further contended the question as to whether the computation should have been as claimed by the assessee or as being claimed by the Assessing Officer which is being debatable question and if so the debatable question cannot be made subject of rectification being settled legal position. For this reason also the Assessing Officer could not have invoked his jurisdiction for rectification and for altering the original assessment order or passing the order at variance with the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the Act as to whether the understanding of the Tribunal as reflected in the order under appeal is the correct understanding or if it is otherwise. 50. Mr. Vohra, learned counsel for the respondent-assessee, has drawn our attention to paragraph 14 of the order of the Tribunal and in this regard has also read us the contents of paragraph 10 of the very order and submits that the finding given by the Tribunal as recorded in these paras. is only in consonance with the provisions of section 80HHD(1) and (3) it is submitted that the phrase "business" in sub-section (3) should be read as the "business" as is referred to in sub-section (1) which means that it is only such business turnover carried on by the assessee who is managing/maintaining such utilization, viz., the hotels which have been certified for the purposes of claiming the benefits under the section and, therefore, would submit that the total turnover which goes into the denominator part of the formula can only be the total turnover of such hotels which have been recognized by the competent authority or in respect of which a certificate has been issued by the competent authority indicating that such hotels are recog....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the assessee as provided in sub- section (4) of section 80HHD of the Act actually invested for the developmental activity as indicated in clauses (a) to (e) of sub-section (4) of section 80HHD of the Act and it is submitted that such was the view taken by the Madras Motors' case [2002] 257 ITR 60 (Mad) while interpreting the provisions of section 80HHC and it should be equally made applicable to the same interpretation for understanding the provisions particularly, as the two provisions are almost in pari materia though not identical and with no other binding authority holding the field, the understanding of the pro- visions of section 80HHC of the Act and the view taken by the Madras High Court commends for acceptance. It is virtually an authority even in understanding the provisions of section 80HHD of the Act and, therefore, the present appeal on applying the present test should only be dismissed. It is further elaborated that sub-section (3) being only for the purpose of sub-section (1) the phrase and expressions as they occur in sub-section (3) of section 80HHD of the Act should necessarily take their colour from sub- section (1) and should be confined to the extent of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al was correct in holding that the powers under section 154 of the Act is co-terminus with the scope of powers under section 143(1)(a) of the Act as computation of deduction could not have been exercised under section 143(1)(a) of the Act and the rectification could not have been done under section 154 of the Act ? 4. Whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that the profits of individual branches of hotels should be taken into account and not the entire profits (including losses) of the assessee for the purpose of computation of deduction under section 80HHD of the Act ?" The first three questions even if re-framed, the questions is relating to the finding of the Tribunal to hold that the assessing authority was denuded of jurisdiction to exercise rectification jurisdiction under section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. for the reason that the order in respect of which the assessing authority sought to invoke the jurisdiction, in reality was an order which was the subject-matter of the appeal before the first appellate authority in the first round of appeal at the instance of the assessee and if so, on the application of the principle of merger, the original ass....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f registration. The assessee filed an appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner against the composite order. The court held that the order of registration made by the Income-tax Officer did not merge in the appellate order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner because the order of registration made by the Income-tax Officer was not the subject-matter of the appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and did not, therefore, merge with the order in appeal. Whether there is merger of the order of assessment in the appel- late order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and if there is, to what extent, came up for consideration before the Gujarat High Court in Karsandas Bhagwandas Patel v. G. V. Shah, ITO [1975] 98 ITR 255 (Guj). The court held that it depends upon the subject-matter of the appellate order. The order of assessment made by the Income-tax Officer merges in the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, only in so far as it relates to items considered and decided by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. That part of the order of assessment which relates to items not forming the subject-matter of the appellate order left untouched does not ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er made the subject-matter of rectification involving questions which were capable of more than one answer and being in the nature of a debatable question. If either view was possible and if earlier the Assessing Officer having taken one view cannot later on change his view on the question to modify the original assessment order invoking the rectification jurisdiction for the reason that what can be set right under section 154 jurisdiction is only errors apparent on the face of the record and not an order of this nature wherein the question as to whether the benefit that can enure to an assessee in terms of section 80HHD of the Act, particularly, for the purpose of quantifying the benefit even as had developed in the context of the present case itself, two views being possible, in the sense, whereas the assessing authority in the earlier instance, had taken the view in one way, later on, the very assessing, authority purporting to exercise rectification jurisdiction understood in a different way, but at any rate, the Tribunal having accepted the interpretation as was sought to be placed on behalf of the assessee in contradiction to the view taken by the assessing authority and the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ub-section (3) of section 80HHD of the Act for the purpose of sub-section (1) of section 80HHD of the Act had totally been missed by the Assessing Officer in the first instance when the assessment order dated March 31, 1999, was passed. 64. While it is true that if the order is one involving a debatable question as indeed the question of qualification of benefits under the terms of section 80HHD of the Act can be a possible debating issue, such stage had not been reached when the assessing authority passed the original assessment order. It is therefore the argument is not attracted to the present set of facts in so far as It relates to the original assessment order. 65. Therefore, questions Nos. 1, 2 and 3 are all answered in the negative against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue. 66. That leaves us with question No. 4. In answering the question of this nature which had arisen before the Tribunal and the Tribunal also essentially following the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Canara Workshops P. Ltd. reported in [1986] 161 ITR 320 (SC) interpreting the provisions of section 80E of the Act and purporting to apply the ratio and also ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... or manufacture or any adventure or concern in the nature of trade, commerce or manufacture" and the phrase "Profits and gains of business or profession" is an expression which is the heading in sub-chapter "D" of Chapter IV which is "D- Profits and gains of business or profession" and submits that the words used in sub- section (3) of section 80HHD of the Act is only in this context and in this background and they cannot be attributed any restrictive meaning so as to restrict it to the activity of business confined to only certified or recognized units of the assessee. 70. The submission is that the total receipts of all the units of the assessee having the business of hotel industry should necessarily be added up for achieving the purpose of sub-section (3) of section 80HHD of the Act and not as suggested by learned counsel for the assessee and that the receipts attributable to non-recognized units of the assessee should be excluded. 71. Learned senior standing counsel for the Revenue would submit that if such a course of action is to be adopted, then the computation as had been arrived at by the assessing authority and as affirmed by the first appellate authority as rig....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....so understanding the limits of such benefit should be confined within the letters of law and cannot by a process of interpretation extended beyond what is actually permitted by the statutory provision is also an equally recognized and accepted mode of interpretation if an exemption provision in a taxing statute. It is, therefore, that while sub-section (3) of section 80HHD of the Act is meant for the purpose of sub-section (1) of section 80HHD of the Act and should not be so understood as to totally defeat the very object and purpose of effectuation of sub-section (1) of section 80HHD of the Act at the same time no question of enlargement of the scope by a process of interpretation! 75. If we look at the scheme of sub-sections of section 80HHD of the Act it is obvious that the Legislature did not want to extend the benefit merely based on the gross foreign exchange receipts but consciously restricted the benefit to only profit portion of the receipts and in arriving at the profit portion has devised a formula in terms of sub-section (3) of section 80HHD of the Act which on working will produce the profits attributable to the foreign exchange receipts of the assessee as part....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....995. These figures are available in the return filed by the assessee in the prescribed form 10CCAD which is extracted as under : ITC Hotels Limited-Consolidated 80HHD Calculation Working Windsor RPS Chola Mughal UKP Vadodara Lallgarh Bay Island Umed Bha Sub Total Cheque Total (Rs). (Rs). (Rs). (Rs). (Rs). (Rs). (Rs). (Rs). (Rs). (Rs). (Rs). (Rs). Profit before tax 114,139,343 59,508,527 61,865,563 73,621,277 5,764,574 32,535,642 4,602,386 3,938,152 (1,522,443) 354,453,021 (36,471,671) 317,981,350 Add : Book depreciation 20,217,199 12,442,042 871,377 445,631 177,547 1,072,014 809,306 322,766 1,525,143 37,883,025 1,896,341 39,779,366 Less tax depreciation 36,410,805 32,022,254 3,253,780 2,597,058 46,267 2,333,539 1,581,629 637,825 1,989,579 80,872,736 3,661,518 84,534,254 97,945,737 39,928,315 59,483,160 71,469,850 5,895,854 31,274,117 3,830,063 3,623,093 (1,986,879) 311.463,310 (38,236,848) 273,226,462 Add : (profit/loss on sale of fixed assets 2,100,915 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,100,915 0 2,100,915 Trading receipts ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd figures for arriving at the amount in respect of which the assessee can claim deduction for the purpose of section 80HHD of the Act. 81. But, as we have already noticed, the area of difference is only as to what should be the figure in the denominator portion, namely, the total receipts from the business of the assessee which is in the nature of hotel industry. The limited area of dispute is whereas the assessee wanted that figure to be a sum total of receipts which were part of the receipts of all recognized certified units of the assessee, the Revenue's stand is that the sum total of the receipts should be necessarily inclusive of all units of the assessee carrying on the business of hotel industry and not confined to the certified hotels as certified by the prescribed authority. 82. While this court had an occasion to examine the application of the formula as it arises in the context of section 80HHC of the Act in the case of Maini Precision Products P. Ltd. v. Joint CIT (I. T. A. Nos. 52 of 2009, 182-185 of 2009 dated 18-8-2009) we indicated the manner of understanding the concept of export turnover vis-a-vis total turnover and the comparison in the present c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e proportion as receipts specified in sub-section (2) of section 80HHD of the Act, etc., we cannot either give a restrictive meaning or understand the words "profits of the business" of the assessee as such profits attributable to only the recognized units of the assessee in the hotel business. It has to be under- stood in the precise manner in which it is so provided and not by reading in further words or trying to understand that as one indicating to be con- fined to the recognized units certified by the prescribed authority and as only profits of the recognized units. It is for this reason we are unable to accept the arguments on behalf of the assessee contending that in arriving at the profits of the business of the assessee the profits is only the profits attributable to the recognized units of the assessee earning foreign exchange. 85. The submission on behalf of the assessee that the profits unit-wise should be ascertained first in respect of all recognized or certified units and the proportionate profits of the foreign exchange receipts should be arrived at by keeping that as a base and determine the admissible benefit for sub- section (1) of section 80HHD of the Ac....