LawforAll
advocatemmmohan
- advocatemmmohan
- since 1985 practicing as advocate in both civil & criminal laws
WELCOME TO LEGAL WORLD
WELCOME TO MY LEGAL WORLD - SHARE THE KNOWLEDGE
Thursday, February 9, 2012
Apex court set aside the Bombay High court orders=the Bombay High Court holding that the entire amount received by an assessee on sale of the Duty Entitlement Pass Book (for short `the DEPB') represents profit on transfer of DEPB under Section 28(iiid) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short `the Act') for the purpose of the computation of deduction in respect of profits retained for export business under Section 80HHC of the Act. =It is a well-settled principle of statutory interpretation of a taxing statute that a subject will be liable to tax and will be entitled to exemption from tax according to the strict language of the taxing statute and if as per the words used in explanation (baa) to Section 80HHC read with the words used in clauses (iiid) and (iiie) of Section 28, the assessee was entitled to a deduction under Section 80HHC on export profits, the benefit of such deduction cannot be denied to the assessee. 23. The impugned judgment and orders of the Bombay High Court are accordingly set-aside. The appeals are allowed to the extent indicated in this judgment. The Assessing Officer is directed to compute the deduction
Reportable
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1699 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) NO. 26558 OF 2010)
M/s Topman Exports ... Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai ... Respondent
WITH
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1700 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 27418 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1701 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.27552 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1704 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.27583 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1705 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 27608 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1706 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.27994 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1707 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.28036 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1708 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.28044; of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1709 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.28131 of 2010),
2
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1710 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.28167 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1711 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.28173 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1728 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.27952 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1729 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.28365 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1730 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.29290 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1731 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.29314 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1732 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.29596 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1733 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30461 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1734 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30462 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1735 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30011 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1736 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30018 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1737 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30020 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1738 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30023 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1739 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30100 of 2010),
3
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1740 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30281 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1741 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30283 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 1712 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30289 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1713 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30306 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1714 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30345 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1715 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30374 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1716 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30375 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1717 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30379 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1718 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30381 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1719 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30393 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1720 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30411 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1721 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30426 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1722 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30468 of 2010),
4
CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 1723-1724 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30521-30522 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1725 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30549 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 1726-1727 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) Nos.29853-29854 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1742 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30215 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1743 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30378 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1744 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30380 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1745 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30388 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1746 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30390 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1747 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30543 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1748 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30546 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1749 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30572 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1750 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30574 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1754 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30657 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1755 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30569 of 2010),
5
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1756 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.32066 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1757 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.32069 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 1758-1759 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) Nos.30733-30734 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1760 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30597 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1761 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30626 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1762 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30634 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1763 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30644 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1764 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30665 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1765 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30671 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1766 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30680 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1767 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30684 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1768 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30689 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1769 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30721 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1770 OF 2012
6
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30902 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1771 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.31085 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1772 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.31107 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1773 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.31131 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1774 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.31134 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1775 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.31304 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1776 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.31385 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1777 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.31450 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1778 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.31849 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1779 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.32531 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1780 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30628 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1781 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30635 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1782 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30646 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1783 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.32532 of 2010),
7
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1784 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30647 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1785 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.32533 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1786 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30653 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1787 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30673 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1788 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30674 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1789 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30675 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1790 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30677 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1791 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30686 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1792 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30708 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1793 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.32534 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1794 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.30906 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1795 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.33218 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 1796-1799 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) Nos.34081-34084 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1800 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.34078 of 2010),
8
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1801 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.32228 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1802 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.32256 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1803 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.33925 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1804 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.32308 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1805 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.32339 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1806 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.32384 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1807 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.34046 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1808 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.34047 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1809 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.32946 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1810 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.33708 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1811 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.33692 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1812 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.33084 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1813 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.33157 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1814 OF 2012
9
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.33265 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1815 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.33504 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1816 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.35013 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1817 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.35016 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1818 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.35028 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1819 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.35029 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1820 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.35030 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1821 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.35031 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1822 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.35032 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1823 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.35129 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1824 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.35865 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1825 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.35866 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1826 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.35867 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1827 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.35868 of 2010),
10
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1828 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.33644 of 2010),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1829 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.57 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1830 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.136 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1831 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.138 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1832 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.131 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1833 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.132 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1834 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.376 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1835 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.302 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1836 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.428 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1837 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.2755 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1838 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.2756 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1839 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.2757 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1840 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.2759 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1841 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 2388 of 2011,
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1842 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.2585 of 2011),
11
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1843 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.2588 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1844 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.2626 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1845 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.2689 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1846 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.2932 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1847 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.2953 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1848 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.2742 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1850 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.2693 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1851 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.5377 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1852 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.5379 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1853 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.5972 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1854 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.7859 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 1855-1856 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) Nos.7868-7869 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1858 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.8786 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1859 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.9547 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1860 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.9548 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1861 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.9549 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1862 OF 2012
12
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.9550 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1863 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.9551 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1864 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.7795 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1865 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.9552 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1866 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.9553 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1867 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.11029 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1868 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.10958 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1869 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.13774 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1870 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.11716 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 1871-1872 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) Nos.14068-14069 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1873 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.14070 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1874 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.14071 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1875 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.14072 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1876 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.14073 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1877 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.14074 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1878 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.14075 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1879 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.14076 of 2011),
13
CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 1880-1881 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) Nos.14077-14078 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 1882-1883 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) Nos.14079-14080 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 1884-1885 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) Nos.16937-16938 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1886 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.16821 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1887 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.16822 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1888 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.16823 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1889 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.16824 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1890 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.16825 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1891 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.15474 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1892 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.16968 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1893 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.16969 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1894 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.17643 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1895 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.16505 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1896 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.17645 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1897 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.17644 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1898 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.16695 of 2011)
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1899 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.22460 of 2011),
14
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1900 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.22180 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1901 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.22446 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1902 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.22449 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1903 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.22447 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1904 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.22772 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1905 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.26556 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1906 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.27677 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1907 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.28775 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1908 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.27044 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1909 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.27048 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1910 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.28776 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1911 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.28067 of 2011),
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1912 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.28607 of 2011)
AND
CIVIL APPEAL No. 1913 OF 2012
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.29542 of 2011)
15
J U D G M E N T
A. K. PATNAIK, J.
Delay condoned. Leave granted in Special Leave Petitions.
2. These are appeals by way of special leave under Article
136 of the Constitution against the judgment and
orders of the Bombay High Court holding that the
entire amount received by an assessee on sale of the
Duty Entitlement Pass Book (for short `the DEPB')
represents profit on transfer of DEPB under Section
28(iiid) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short `the Act')
for the purpose of the computation of deduction in
respect of profits retained for export business under
Section 80HHC of the Act.
3. For appreciating the controversy between the parties,
we will state the facts of only the lead case of M/s
Topman Exports (hereinafter referred to as `the
assessee'). The assessee is a manufacturer and
exporter of fabrics and garments. During the previous
year relevant to the assessment year 2002-2003, the
assessee sold the DEPB and DFRC (Duty Free
Replenishment Certificate) which had accrued to the
16
assessee on export of its products. The assessee filed
a return for the assessment year 2002-2003 claiming a
deduction of Rs.83,69,303/- under Section 80HHC of
the Act. The Assessing Officer held that if the profit on
transfer of the export incentives was deducted from the
profits of the assessee, the figure would be a loss and
there will be no positive income of the assessee from
its export business and the assessee will not be
entitled to any deduction under Section 80HHC of the
Act as has been held by this Court in IPCA
Laboratories Ltd. v. Deputy C.I.T. (2004) 266 ITR 521
(SC). Aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the
Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and contended
that the profits on the transfer of DEPB and DFRC
were not the sale proceeds of DEPB and DFRC
amounting to Rs.2,06,84,841/- and Rs.1,65,616/-
respectively, but the difference between the sale value
and face value of DEPB and DFRC amounting to
Rs.14,35,097/- and Rs.19,902/- respectively and if
these figures of profits on transfer of DEPB and DFRC
are taken, the income of assessee would be positive
17
and the assessee would be entitled to the deduction
under Section 80HHC of the Act. The Commissioner of
Income Tax (Appeals) rejected this contention of the
assessee and held that the assessee had received an
amount of Rs.2,06,84,841/- on sale of DEPB and an
amount of Rs.1,65,612/- on sale of DFRC and the
costs of acquisition of the DEPB and DFRC are to be
taken as nil and hence the entire sale proceeds of
DEPB and DFRC realized by the assessee are to be
treated as profits on transfer of DEPB and DFRC for
working out the deduction under section 80HHC of the
Act and directed the Assessing Officer to work out the
deduction under Section 80HHC of the Act
accordingly.
4. Aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short `the
Tribunal'). A Special Bench of the Tribunal heard the
appeal and held that there was a direct relation
between the entitlement under the DEPB Scheme and
the custom duty component in the cost of imports
used in the manufacture of the export product. The
18
Tribunal further held that DEPB accrues to the
exporter soon after export is made and application is
filed for DEPB and DEPB is a "cash assistance"
receivable by the assessee and is covered under clause
(iiib) of Section 28 of the Act, whereas profit on the
transfer of DEPB takes place on a subsequent date
when the DEPB is sold by the assessee and is covered
under clause (iiid) of Section 28 of the Act. The
Tribunal compared the language of Section 28(iiib) of
the Act in which the expression "cash assistance" is
used, with the language of Section 28(iiia), (iiid) and
(iiie) of the Act in which the expression "profit" is used
and held that the words "profit on transfer" in Section
28 (iiid) and (iiie) of the Act would not represent the
entire sale value of DEPB but the sale value of DEPB
less the face value of the DEPB. With these reasons,
the Tribunal set aside the orders of the Assessing
Officer and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)
and directed the Assessing Officer to compute the
deduction under Section 80HHC of the Act
accordingly.
19
5. This judgment of the Special Bench of the Tribunal
was followed by the Tribunal in all the cases in appeal
before us. Against the judgment and orders of the
Tribunal, the Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai
filed appeals in all the cases under Section 260A of the
Act before the High Court and by the impugned orders
the High Court disposed of the appeals in terms of the
judgment delivered in Commissioner of the Income Tax
vs. Kalpataru Colours and Chemicals (ITA(L) 2887 of
2009). In Commissioner of the Income Tax vs.
Kalpataru Colours and Chemicals (supra), the High
Court formulated the following two substantial
questions of law:
"(a) Whether the Tribunal is justified in
holding that the entire amount received on
the sale of the Duty Entitlement Passbook
does not represent profits chargeable under
Section 28(iiid) of the Income Tax Act, 1961
and that the face value of the Duty
Entitlement Passbook shall be deducted from
the sale proceeds;
(b) Whether the Tribunal is justified in
holding that the face value of the Duty
Entitlement Passbook is chargeable to tax
under Section 28(iiib) at the time of accrual of
income i.e. when the application for Duty
Entitlement Passbook is filed with the
competent authority pursuant to the exports
20
made and that the profits on the sale of Duty
Entitlement Passbook representing the excess
of the sale proceeds over the face value is
liable to be considered under Section 28(iiid)
at the time of sale."
In its judgment, on the first question of law formulated
under (a), the High Court held that the Tribunal was not
justified in holding that the entire amount received on the
sale of the DEPB does not represent profits chargeable
under Section 28(iiid) of the Act and in holding that the face
value of the DEPB shall be deducted from the sale proceeds
of the DEPB. On the second question of law formulated
under (b), the High Court in its judgment did not agree with
the Tribunal that the face value of DEPB is chargeable to
tax as income of the assessee under Section 28(iiib) of the
Act and instead held that the entirety of sale consideration
for transfer of DEPB would fall within the purview of Section
28(iiid) of the Act. In some of the cases, the appellants filed
review petitions before the High Court, but the High Court
dismissed the review petitions.
6. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted, relying
on the provisions of the DEPB Scheme, that the Tribunal
was right in coming to the conclusion that DEPB was cash
21
assistance receivable by a person against exports and
accrued to the exporter as soon as he files an application for
DEPB. They submitted that DEPB was therefore chargeable
to income tax under the head "Profits and Gains of Business
or Profession" under clause (iiib) of Section 28 of the Act.
They submitted that the contention of the Revenue that
DEPB would be income chargeable to tax only on transfer
and would be covered under clause (iiid) of Section 28 of the
Act is not correct. They submitted that it will be clear from
different provisions of the DEPB Scheme that the object of
granting DEPB to an exporter is to neutralize the incidence
of custom duties which has been incurred on the import
component of the export product and this neutralization is
achieved by grant of duty credit of the amount specified in
the DEPB Scheme. They submitted that the Tribunal,
therefore, was right in coming to the conclusion that there
was a direct relation between the DEPB and the cost of
inputs imported for manufacture of the export product.
7. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that
since DEPB was cash assistance receivable by a person
against exports and was covered under clause (iiib) of
22
Section 28 of the Act and it has a direct relation with the
costs of the inputs imported by an exporter from
manufacturer of the export product, the DEPB cannot form
part of the profits on transfer of DEPB under Section 28(iiid)
of the Act. They argued that as and when DEPB is
transferred and the sale value realized on such transfer of
DEPB is more than the face value of the DEPB, the
difference between the sale value and face value of the
DEPB will constitute profit on transfer of DEPB and would
be covered under clause (iiid) of Section 28 of the Act. They
argued that if the intention of the legislature was to cover
the entire sale proceeds arising on transfer of DEPB under
clause (iiid) of Section 28 of the Act then they would have
used the expression "sale proceeds" instead of profit on
transfer of DEPB in clause (iiid) of Section 28 of the Act.
8. Learned counsel for the appellants argued that if the
entire sale proceeds of the DEPB is treated as profits arising
on transfer of DEPB for the purpose of clause (iiid) of
Section 28 as contended by the Revenue, then the assessee
will be taxed twice for the same income, once as cash
assistance under clause (iiib) of Section 28 equivalent to the
23
face value of the DEPB and for the second time as profit on
transfer of DEPB under clause (iiid) of Section 28, the face
value of the DEPB being part of the sale proceeds of the
DEPB on transfer. They submitted that as the legislature
could not have intended such double taxation of the same
income, the interpretation suggested by the Revenue should
not be accepted by the Court. They submitted that in the
present batch of cases, DEPB accrued to the assessees in
the first year when the assessees made the export and
applied for DEPB and the assessee sold the DEPB in
subsequent year and the Revenue has taken a stand that in
the subsequent year, the entire sale proceeds comprising
both the face value of the DEPB and the profits on transfer
of DEPB are covered under Section 28(iiid) of the Act and
this stand of the Revenue has been accepted by the High
Court in the impugned orders on an incorrect interpretation
of the DEPB scheme and the provisions of Section 28 of the
Act and 80HHC of the Act.
9. Learned counsel for the Revenue, on the other hand,
supported the impugned judgment and orders of the High
Court and submitted that profit on transfer of DEPB would
24
represent the entire sale value realized by the assessee on
transfer of the DEPB. He submitted that the High Court
has rightly held that the assessee does not incur any cost in
obtaining the DEPB. He argued that DEPB is an export
incentive granted by the Government under DEPB Scheme
and it has no direct relation with the cost of purchases
made by the assessee and therefore the assessee is not
entitled to deduct the face value of the DEPB from the sale
proceeds for determining the profit arising on transfer of
DEPB and the entire sale proceeds of the DEPB represent
the profits earned by the assessee on transfer of the DEPB.
He argued that the findings of the Tribunal that there is a
direct relation between DEPB and the costs incurred by the
assessee for importing inputs for manufacture of export
products is, therefore, not correct and the High Court was
right in setting aside the findings of the Tribunal and in
coming to the conclusion that the entire sale proceeds of
DEPB represent the profits on transfer of DEPB within the
meaning of clause (iiid) of Section 28 of the Act.
10. For appreciating the nature of the DEPB, paragraphs
4.37 and 4.42 of the Hand Book on DEPB issued by the
25
Government of India and paragraphs 7.14, 7.15, 7.16 and
7.38 of the Export and Import Policy, 1997-2002 as notified
by the Central Government in the Notification No.1(RE-99)/
1997-2202 dated 31st March, 2000 are extracted
hereinbelow:
Hand Book on DEPB
"4.37 Duty Entitlement Passbook Scheme
(DEPB)
The Policy relating to Duty Entitlement
Passbook (DEPB) Scheme is given in Chapter-
4 of the Policy. The duty credit under the
scheme shall be calculated by taking into
account the deemed import content of the
said export product as per SION and the
basic custom duty payable on such deemed
imports. The value addition achieved by
export of such product shall also be taken
into account while determining the rate of
duty credit under the scheme.
4.42 Utilization of DEPB credit.
The credit under DEPB shall be utilized for
payment of customs duty on any item which
is freely importable.
Export and Import Policy, 1997-2002
7.14 For exporters not desirous of going
through the licensing route, an optional
facility is given under DEPB. The objective of
Duty Entitlement Passbook Scheme is to
neutralize the incidence of Customs duty on
26
the import content of the export product.
The neutralization shall be provided by way
of grant of duty credit against the export
product.
Under the Duty Entitlement Passbook
Scheme (DEPB), an exporter may supply for
credit, as a specified percentage of FOB value
of exports, made in freely convertible
currency. The credit shall be available
against such export products and at such
rates as may be specified by the Director
General of Foreign Trade by way of public
notice issued in this behalf, for import of raw
materials, intermediates, components, parts
packing material etc.
The holder of Duty Entitlement Passbook
Scheme (DEPB) shall have the option to pay
additional customs duty, if any, in cash as
well.
Validity 7.15. The DEPB shall be valid for a
period of 12 months from the date of issue.
7.16 The DEPB and/or the items imported
against it are freely transferable. The
transfer of DEPB shall however be for import
at the port specified in the DEPB which shall
be the port from where exports have been
made. However, imports from a port other
than the port of export shall be allowed under
TRA facility as per the terms and conditions
of the notification issued by Department of
Revenue.
7.38 (i) An application for grant of credit
under DEPB may be made to the licensing
authority concerned in the form given in
Appendix-11C alongwith the documents
prescribed therein. The provisions of
paragraphs 7.2 shall be applicable for DEPB
27
also. The FOB value in free foreign exchange
shall be converted into Indian rupees as per
the authorized dealer's T/T buying rate,
prevalent on the date of
negotiation/purchase/collection of
document. The DEPB rate of credit shall be
applied on the FOB value so arrived. In case
of advance payment, the FOB value in free
foreign exchange shall be converted into
Indian rupees as per the authorized dealer's
T/T buying rate, prevalent on the date of
receipt of advance payment.
(ii) The DEPB shall be initially issued with
non transferable endorsement in such cases
where realization has not taken place to
enable the exporter to effect import for his
own use. However, upon receipt of
realization, the DEPB shall be endorsed
transferable. In such cases where the
applicant applies for DEPB after realization,
the DEPB shall be issued with transferable
endorsement."
On a reading of the aforesaid paragraphs of the Hand Book
on DEPB and the Export and Import Policy of the
Government of India, 1997-2002, it is clear that the
objective of DEPB scheme is to neutralize the incidence of
customs duty on the import content of the export products.
Hence, it has direct nexus with the cost of the imports made
by an exporter for manufacturing the export products. The
neutralization of the cost of customs duty under the DEPB
scheme, however, is by granting a duty credit against the
28
export product and this credit can be utilized for paying
customs duty on any item which is freely importable. DEPB
is issued against the exports to the exporter and is
transferable by the exporter.
11. We may now consider the relevant provisions of
Section 28 for determining whether DEPB will fall under
clause (iiib) or under clause (iiid) of Section 28. The
relevant provisions of Section 28 of the Act are reproduced
hereunder:
Section 28. Profits and Gains of Business or
Profession.--The following income shall be
chargeable to income-tax under the head "Profits
and gains of business or profession",--
.........................................................................
(iiia) profits on sale of a licence granted under the
Imports (Control) Order, 1955, made under the
Imports and Exports (Control)Act, 1947 (18 of
1947);
(iiib) cash assistance (by whatever name called)
received or receivable by any person against
exports under any scheme of the Government of
India;]
(iiic) ..................................................................
(iiid) any profit on the transfer of the Duty
Entitlement Pass Book Scheme, being the Duty
Remission Scheme under the export and import
policy formulated and announced under section 5
29
of the Foreign Trade (Development and
Regulation) Act, 1992 (22 of 1992)
(iiie) any profit on the transfer of the Duty Free
Replenishment Certificate, being the Duty
Remission Scheme under the export and import
policy formulated and announced under section 5
of the Foreign Trade (Development and
Regulation) Act, 1992 (22 of 1992)."
12. It will be clear from the aforesaid provisions of Section
28 that under clause (iiib) cash assistance (by whatever
name called) received or receivable by any person against
exports under any scheme of the Government of India is by
itself income chargeable to income tax under the head
"Profits and Gains of Business or Profession". DEPB is a
kind of assistance given by the Government of India to an
exporter to pay customs duty on its imports and it is
receivable once exports are made and an application is
made by the exporter for DEPB. We have, therefore, no
doubt that DEPB is "cash assistance" receivable by a person
against exports under the scheme of the Government of
India and falls under clause (iiib) of Section 28 and is
chargeable to income tax under the head "Profits and Gains
30
of Business or Profession" even before it is transferred by
the assessee.
13. Under clause (iiid) of Section 28, any profit on
transfer of DEPB is chargeable to income tax under the
head "Profits and Gains of Business or Profession" as an
item separate from cash assistance under clause (iiib). The
word "profit" means the gross proceeds of a business
transaction less the costs of the transaction. To quote from
Black's Law Dictionary (Fifth Edition):
"Profit. Most commonly, the gross proceeds of a
business transaction less the costs of the
transaction, i.e. net proceeds. Excess of revenues
over expenses for a transaction; sometimes used
synonymously with net income for the period.
Gain realized from business or investment over
and above expenditures."
This Court in E.D. Sassoon & Company Ltd. and Others v.
Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bombay City (1954) 26 ITR 27
(SC) has quoted the following observations of Lord Justice
Fletcher Moulton in The Spanish Prospecting Company
Limited [(1911) I Ch. 92] on the meaning of the word
"profits":
31
".... `Profits' implies a comparison between the
state of a business at two specific dates usually
separated by an interval of a year. The
fundamental meaning is the amount of gain
made by the business during the year. This can
only be ascertained by a comparison of the assets
of the business at the two dates."
`Profits', therefore, imply a comparison of the value of an
asset when the asset is acquired with the value of the asset
when the asset is transferred and the difference between the
two values is the amount of profit or gain made by a person.
As DEPB has direct nexus with the cost of imports for
manufacturing an export product, any amount realized by
the assessees over and above the DEPB on transfer of the
DEPB would represent profit on the transfer of DEPB.
14. We are, thus, of the considered opinion that while the
face value of the DEPB will fall under clause (iiib) of Section
28 of the Act, the difference between the sale value and the
face value of the DEPB will fall under clause (iiid) of Section
28 of the Act and the High Court was not right in taking the
view in the impugned judgment that the entire sale
proceeds of the DEPB realized on transfer of the DEPB and
32
not just the difference between the sale value and the face
value of the DEPB represent profit on transfer of the DEPB.
15. We may now point out the errors in the impugned
judgment of the High Court. The first reason given by the
High Court is that clause (iiia) of Section 28 treats profits on
the sale of an import license as income chargeable to tax
and when the license is sold, the entire amount is treated as
profits of business under clause (iiia) of Section 28 and thus
there is no justification to treat the amount which is
received by an exporter on the transfer of the DEPB any
differently than the profits which are made on the sale of an
import license under clause (iiia) of Section 28 of the Act. In
taking the view that when the import license is sold the
entire amount is treated as profits of business, the High
Court has visualized a situation where the cost of acquiring
the import license is nil. The cost of acquiring DEPB, on the
other hand, is not nil because the person acquires it by
paying customs duty on the import content of the export
product and the DEPB which accrues to a person against
exports has a cost element in it. Accordingly, when DEPB is
sold by a person, his profit on transfer of DEPB would be
33
the sale value of the DEPB less the face value of DEPB
which represents the cost of the DEPB. The second reason
given by the High Court in the impugned judgment is that
under the DEPB scheme, DEPB is given at a percentage of
the FOB value of the exports so as to neutralize the
incidence of customs duty on the import content of the
export products, but the exporter may not himself utilize the
DEPB for paying customs duty but may transfer it to
someone else and therefore the entire sum received on
transfer of DEPB would be covered under clause (iiid) of
Section 28. The High Court has failed to appreciate that
DEPB represents part of the cost incurred by a person for
manufacture of the export product and hence even where
the DEPB is not utilized by the exporter but is transferred to
another person, the DEPB continues to remain as a cost to
the exporter. When, therefore, DEPB is transferred by a
person, the entire sum received by him on such transfer
does not become his profits. It is only the amount that he
receives in excess of the DEPB which represents his profits
on transfer of the DEPB.
34
16. The High Court has sought to meet the argument of
double taxation made on behalf of the assessees by holding
that where the face value of the DEPB was offered to tax in
the year in which the credit accrued to the assessee as
business profits, then any further profit arising on transfer
of DEPB would be taxed as profits of business under
Section 28(iiid) in the year in which the transfer of DEPB
took place. This view of the High Court, in our considered
opinion, is contrary to the language of Section 28 of the Act
under which "cash assistance" received or receivable by any
person against exports such as the DEPB and "profit on
transfer of the DEPB" are treated as two separate items of
income under clauses (iiib) and (iiid) of Section 28. If
accrual of DEPB and profit on transfer of DEPB are treated
as two separate items of income chargeable to tax under
clauses (iiib) and (iiid) of Section 28 of the Act, then DEPB
will be chargeable as income under clause (iiib) of Section
28 in the year in which the person applies for DEPB credit
against the exports and the profit on transfer of the DEPB
by that person will be chargeable as income under clause
(iiid) of Section 28 in his hands in the year in which he
35
makes the transfer. Accordingly, if in the same previous
year the DEPB accrues to a person and he also earns profit
on transfer of the DEPB, the DEPB will be business profits
under clause (iiib) and the difference between the sale value
and the DEPB (face value) would be the profits on the
transfer of DEPB under clause (iiid) for the same
assessment year. Where, however, the DEPB accrues to a
person in one previous year and the transfer of DEPB takes
place in a subsequent previous year, then the DEPB will be
chargeable as income of the person for the first assessment
year chargeable under clause (iiib) of Section 28 and the
difference between the DEPB credit and the sale value of the
DEPB credit would be income in his hands for the
subsequent assessment year chargeable under clause (iiid)
of Section 28. The interpretation suggested by us, therefore,
does not lead to double taxation of the same income, which
the legislature must be presumed to have avoided.
17. The High Court has held that as the assessees had an
export turnover exceeding Rs.10 crores and did not fulfill
the conditions set out in the third proviso to Section
80HHC(3) of the Act, the assessees were not entitled to a
36
deduction under Section 80HHC on the amount received on
transfer of DEPB and to get over this difficulty the assessees
have contended that the profits on transfer of DEPB in
Section 28(iiid) would not include the face value of the
DEPB so that the assessees get a deduction under Section
80HHC on the face value of the DEPB. This finding of the
High Court is not based on an accurate understanding
scheme of Section 80HHC of the Act.
18. The relevant provisions of Section 80HHC are quoted
hereinbelow:
"Section 80HHC- Deduction in respect of
profits retained for export business.-- [(1)
Where an assessee, being an Indian company or
a person (other than a company) resident in
India, is engaged in the business of export out of
India of any goods or merchandise to which this
section applies, there shall, in accordance with
and subject to the provisions of this section, be
allowed, in computing the total income of the
assessee, [a deduction to the extent of profits,
referred to in sub-section (1B),] derived by the
assessee from the export of such goods or
merchandise:
.........................................................................
(1B) For the purposes of sub-sections (1) and
(1A), the extent of deduction of the profits shall
be an amount equal to--
37
(i) eighty per cent thereof for an assessment
year beginning on the 1st day of April, 2001;
(ii) seventy per cent thereof for an assessment
year beginning on the 1st day of April, 2002;
(iii) fifty per cent thereof for an assessment year
beginning on the 1st day of April, 2003;
(iv) thirty per cent thereof for an assessment
year beginning on the 1st day of April,
2004,]
and no deduction shall be allowed in respect of
the assessment year beginning on the 1st day of
April, 2005 and any subsequent assessment
year.]
.........................................................................
(3) For the purposes of sub-section (1),--
(a) where the export out of India is of goods or
merchandise manufactured [or processed] by the
assessee, the profits derived from such export
shall be the amount which bears to the profits of
the business, the same proportion as the export
turnover in respect of such goods bears to the
total turnover of the business carried on by the
assessee;
.........................................................................
Provided that the profits computed under clause
(a) or clause (b) or clause (c) of this sub-section
shall be further increased by the amount which
bears to ninety per cent of any sum referred to in
clause (iiia) (not being profits on sale of a licence
acquired from any other person), and clauses
(iiib) and (iiic) of section 28, the same proportion as
the export turnover bears to the total turnover of
the business carried on by the assessee :
38
Provided further that in the case of an asseesee
having export turnover not exceeding rupees ten
crores during the previous year, the profits
computed under clause (a) or clause (b) or clause
(c) of this sub-section or after giving effect to the
first proviso, as the case may be, shall be further
increased by the amount which bears to ninety
per cent of any sum referred to in clause (iiid) or
clause (iiie), as the case may be, of section 28,
the same proportion as the export turnover bears
to the total turnover of the business carried on by
the assessee;
Provided also that in the case of an assessee
having export turnover exceeding rupees ten
crores during the previous year, the profits
computed under clause (a) or clause (b) or clause
(c) of this sub-section or after giving effect to the
first proviso, as the case may be, shall be further
increased by the amount which bears to ninety
per cent of any sum referred to in clause (iiid) of
section 28, the same proportion as the export
turnover bears to the total turnover of the
business carried on by the assessee, if the
assessee has necessary and sufficient evidence to
prove that,--
(a) he had an option to choose either the duty
drawback or the Duty Entitlement Pass
Book Scheme, being the Duty Remission
Scheme; and
(b) the rate of drawback credit attributable to
the customs duty was higher than the rate
of credit allowable under the Duty
Entitlement Pass Book Scheme, being the
Duty Remission Scheme.
Provided also that in the case of an assessee
having export turnover exceeding rupees ten
crores during the previous year, the profits
39
computed under clause (a) or clause (b) or clause
(c) of this sub-section or after giving effect to the
first proviso, as the case may be, shall be further
increased by the amount which bears to ninety
per cent of any sum referred to in clause (iiie) of
section 28, the same proportion as the export
turnover bears to the total turnover of the
business carried on by the assessee, if the
assessee has necessary and sufficient evidence to
prove that--
(a) he had an option to choose either the
duty drawback or the Duty Free
Replenishment Certificate, being the
Duty Remission Scheme; and
(b) the rate of drawback credit attributable
to the customs duty was higher than
the rate of credit allowable under the
Duty Free Replenishment Certificate,
being the Duty Remission Scheme.
Explanation.--For the purposes of this clause,
`rate of credit allowable' means the rate of credit
allowable under the Duty Free Replenishment
Certificate, being the Duty Remission Scheme
calculated in the manner as may be notified by
the Central Government:]
.........................................................................
Explanation:- For the purposes of this section,-
(baa) `profits of the business' means the profits of
the business as computed under the head
`Profits and gains of business or profession'
as reduced by-
(1) ninety per cent of any sum referred to in
clauses (iiia), (iiib), (iiic), (iiid) and (iiie) of
Section 28 or of any receipts by way of
brokerage, commission, interest, rent,
40
charges or any other receipt of a similar
nature included in such profits; and
(2) the profits of any branch, office,
warehouse or any other establishment of
the assessee situate outside India"
19. Sub-section (1) of Section 80HHC quoted above makes
it clear that an assessee engaged in the business of export
out of India of any goods or merchandise to which this
Section applies shall be allowed, in computing his total
income, a deduction to the extent of profits referred to in
sub-section (1B), derived by him from the export of such
goods or merchandise. Sub-section (1B) of Section 80HHC
gives the percentages of deduction of the profits allowable
for the different assessment years from the assessment
years 2001-2002 to 2004-2005. Sub-section (3)(a) of
Section 80HHC provides that where the export out of India
is of goods or merchandise manufactured or processed by
the assessee, the profits derived from such exports shall be
the amount which bears to the profits of the business, the
same proportion as the export turnover in respect of such
goods bears to the total turnover of the business carried on
by the assessee. In Commissioner of Income-Tax v. K.
41
Ravindranathan Nair (2007) 295 ITR 228 (SC), the formula
in sub-section (3)(a) of Section 80HHC was stated by this
Court to be as follows:
Profits derived = Profits of the business x Export Turnover
from exports Total Turnover
20. Explanation (baa) under Section 80HHC states that
"profits of the business" in the aforesaid formula means the
profits of the business as computed under the head "Profits
and Gains of Business or Profession" as reduced by (1)
ninety per cent of any sum referred to in clauses (iiia), (iiib),
(iiic), (iiid) and (iiie) of Section 28 or of any receipts by way of
brokerage, commission, interest, rent, charges or any other
receipt of similar nature including any such receipts and (2)
the profits of any branch, office, warehouse or any other
establishment of the assessee situated outside India. Thus,
ninety per cent of the DEPB which is "cash assistance"
against exports and is covered under clause (iiib) of Section
28 will get excluded from the "profits of the business" of the
assessee if such DEPB has accrued to the assessee during
the previous year. Similarly, if during the same previous
year, the assessee has transferred the DEPB and the sale
42
value of such DEPB is more than the face value of the
DEPB, the difference between the sale value of the DEPB
and the face value of the DEPB will represent the profit on
transfer of DEPB covered under clause (iiid) of Section 28
and ninety per cent of such profit on transfer of DEPB
certificate will get excluded from "profits of the business".
But, where the DEPB accrues to the assessee in the first
previous year and the assessee transfers the DEPB
certificate in the second previous year, as appears to have
happened in the present batch of cases, only ninety per cent
of the profits on transfer of DEPB covered under clause (iiid)
and not ninety per cent of the entire sale value including the
face value of the DEPB will get excluded from the "profits of
the business". Thus, where the ninety per cent of the face
value of the DEPB does not get excluded from "profits of the
business" under explanation (baa) and only ninety per cent
of the difference between the face value of the DEPB and the
sale value of the DEPB gets excluded from "profits of the
business", the assessee gets a bigger figure of "profits of the
business" and this is possible when the DEPB accrues to
the assessee in one previous year and transfer of the DEPB
43
takes place in the subsequent previous year. The result in
such case is that a higher figure of "profits of the business'"
becomes the multiplier in the aforesaid formula under sub-
section (3)(a) of Section 80HHC for arriving at the figure of
profits derived from exports.
21. To the figure of profits derived from exports worked out
as per the aforesaid formula under sub-section (3)(a) of
Section 80HHC, the additions as mentioned in first, second,
third and fourth proviso under sub-section (3) are made to
profits derived from exports. Under the first proviso, ninety
per cent of the sum referred to in clauses (iiia), (iiib) and
(iiic) of Section 28 are added in the same proportion as
export turnover bears to the total turnover of the business
carried on by the assessee. In this first proviso, there is no
addition of any sum referred to in clause (iiid) or clause
(iiie). Hence, profit on transfer of DEPB or DFRC are not to
be added under the first proviso. Where therefore in the
previous year no DEPB or DFRC accrues to the assessee, he
would not be entitled to the benefit of the first proviso to
sub-section (3) of Section 80HHC because he would not
have any sum referred to in clause (iiib) of Section 28 of the
44
Act. The second proviso to sub-section (3) of Section
80HHC states that in case of an assessee having export
turnover not exceeding Rs.10 crores during the previous
year, after giving effect to the first proviso, the export profits
are to be increased further by the amount which bears to
ninety per cent of any sum referred to in clauses (iiid) and
(iiie) of Section 28, the same proportion as the export
turnover bears to the total turnover of the business carried
on by the assessee. The third proviso to sub-section (3)
states that in case of an assessee having export turnover
exceeding Rs.10 crores, similar addition of ninety per cent of
the sums referred to in clause (iiid) of Section 28 only if the
assessee has the necessary and sufficient evidence to prove
that (a) he had an option to choose either the duty
drawback or the Duty Entitlement Pass Book Scheme, being
the Duty Remission Scheme; and (b) the rate of drawback
credit attributable to the customs duty was higher than the
rate of credit allowable under the Duty Entitlement Pass
Book Scheme, being the Duty Remission Scheme.
Therefore, if the assessee having export turnover of more
than Rs.10 crores does not satisfy these two conditions, he
45
will not be entitled to the addition of profit on transfer of
DEPB under the third proviso to sub-section (3) of Section
80HHC.
22. The aforesaid discussion would show that where an
assessee has an export turnover exceeding Rs.10 crores and
has made profits on transfer of DEPB under clause (d) of
Section 28, he would not get the benefit of addition to export
profits under third or fourth proviso to sub-section (3) of
Section 80HHC, but he would get the benefit of exclusion of
a smaller figure from "profits of the business" under
explanation (baa) to Section 80HHC of the Act and there is
nothing in explanation (baa) to Section 80HHC to show that
this benefit of exclusion of a smaller figure from "profits of
the business" will not be available to an assessee having an
export turnover exceeding Rs.10 crores. In other words,
where the export turnover of an assessee exceeds Rs.10
crores, he does not get the benefit of addition of ninety per
cent of export incentive under clause (iiid) of Section 28 to
his export profits, but he gets a higher figure of profits of the
business, which ultimately results in computation of a
bigger export profit. The High Court, therefore, was not
46
right in coming to the conclusion that as the assessee did
not have the export turnover exceeding Rs.10 crores and as
the assessee did not fulfill the conditions set out in the third
proviso to Section 80HHC (iii), the assessee was not entitled
to a deduction under Section 80HHC on the amount
received on transfer of DEPB and with a view to get over this
difficulty the assessee was contending that the profits on
transfer of DEPB under Section 28 (iiid) would not include
the face value of the DEPB. It is a well-settled principle of
statutory interpretation of a taxing statute that a subject
will be liable to tax and will be entitled to exemption from
tax according to the strict language of the taxing statute and
if as per the words used in explanation (baa) to Section
80HHC read with the words used in clauses (iiid) and (iiie)
of Section 28, the assessee was entitled to a deduction
under Section 80HHC on export profits, the benefit of such
deduction cannot be denied to the assessee.
23. The impugned judgment and orders of the Bombay
High Court are accordingly set-aside. The appeals are
allowed to the extent indicated in this judgment. The
Assessing Officer is directed to compute the deduction
47
under Section 80HHC in the case of the appellants in
accordance with this judgment. There shall be no order as
to costs.
..........................CJI.
(S.H. Kapadia)
.............................J.
(A. K. Patnaik)
.............................J.
(Swatanter
Kumar)
New Delhi,
February 08, 2012.