Supreme court of India

Synco Industries

v.

Assessing Officer, Income Tax, Mumbai

ASHOK BHAN AND J.M. PANCHAL, JJ.

CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 4190-4191 OF 2002

AND 4192-4193 OF 2002

March 13, 2008

 

 

 

 

Section 80HH, read with section 80-I of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Deductions - Profits and gains from hotels or industrials undertakings etc., in backward areas - Assessment years 1990-91 and 1991-92 - Whether while working out gross total income of an assessee losses suffered have to be adjusted and if gross total income of assessee is ‘Nil’, assessee will not be entitled to deduction under Chapter VI-A - Held, yes - Assessee was engaged in business of oil and chemicals - It had suffered losses in oil division - Assessee claimed deductions under section 80HH and 80-I in respect of profits earned from chemical division claiming that each unit should be treated separately and loss suffered by oil division was not adjustable against profits of chemical division for purpose of deduction - Assessing Officer rejected claim on ground that gross total income of assessee before deductions under Chapter VIA was nil - Whether loss from oil division was required to be adjusted before determining gross total income and as gross total income was ‘Nil’, assessee was not entitled to claim deduction under Chapter VI-A - Held, yes

 

FACTS

The assessee-company was engaged in the business of oil and chemicals. The assessee had suffered losses in the oil division in earlier years. The assessee claimed deductions under section 80HH and 80-I, claiming that each unit should be treated separately and the loss suffered by the oil division in earlier years was not adjustable against the profits of the chemical division while considering the question whether deductions under sections 80HH and 80-I were allowable.  The Assessing Officer noticed that the gross total income of the assessee before deductions under Chapter VI-A was 'nil'.  Therefore, he concluded that the assessee was not entitled to the benefit of deductions under Chapter VI-A.  The Commissioner (Appeals) as well as the Tribunal confirmed the view of the Assessing Officer. On appeal under section 260A, the High Court upheld the opinion expressed by the lower authorities that the gross total income must be determined by setting off against the income, the business losses of the earlier years, before allowing deduction under Chapter VI-A and if the resultant income was ‘nil’, then the assessee could not claim deduction under Chapter VI-A.

On appeal to the Supreme Court:

HELD

If the gross total income of the assessee is determined  as 'Nil' then there is no question of any deduction being allowed under Chapter VI-A in computing the total income. The  Assessing Officer has to take into account the provisions of section 71 providing for set off of loss from one head against income from another and section 72 providing for carry forward and set off of business losses.  Section 32(2) makes provisions for carry forward and set off of the unabsorbed depreciation of a particular year.  The effect of the these provisions is that while computing the total income, the losses carried forward and depreciation have to be adjusted and, thereafter, the Assessing Officer has to work out the gross total income of the assessee.  Sub-section (2) of section 80A specifically enacts that the aggregate of deductions under Chapter VI-A should not exceed the gross total income of the assessee.  If the gross total income is found to be a net loss on account of the adjustment of losses of the earlier years or 'Nil', no deduction under this Chapter can be allowed.  The effect of Clause (5) of section 80B is that gross total income will be arrived at after making the computation as follows:-

 

(i)         making deductions under the appropriate computation provisions;

 

(ii)        including the incomes, if any, under sections 60 to 64 in the total income of the individual;

 

(iii)       adjusting intra-head and/or inter-head losses; and

 

(iv)       setting off brought forward unabsorbed losses and unabsorbed depreciation, etc.  [Para 8]

The predominant majority of the High Courts have taken the view that deductions under Chapter VI-A would be available only if the computation of gross total income as per the provisions of the Act after setting off carried forward loss and unabsorbed depreciation of earlier years is not ‘nil’.   [Para 10]

The that predominant majority of the High Courts have taken the view that while working out gross total income of an assessee the losses suffered have to be adjusted and if the gross total income of the assessee is 'nil', the assessee will not be entitled to deduction under Chapter VI-A.  It is well settled that where the predominant majority of the High Courts have taken certain view on the interpretation of certain provisions, the Supreme Court would lean in favour of the predominant view.  Therefore, the High Court was justified in holding that gross total income must be determined, by setting off against the income, the business losses of earlier years, before allowing deduction under Chapter VI-A and if the resultant income was 'nil', then the asessee could not claim deduction under Chapter VI-A.  [Para 11]

The contention that under section 80-I (6) the profits derived from one industrial undertaking could not be set off against loss suffered from another and the profit is required to be computed as if profit making industrial undertaking was the only source of income, had no merits.  Section 80-I (1) lays down that where the gross total income of the assessee includes any profits derived from the priority undertaking/unit/division, then in computing the total income of the assessee, a deduction from such profits of an amount equal to 20 per cent has to be made.  Section 80-I (1) lays down the broad parameters indicating circumstances under which an assessee would be entitled to claim deduction.  On the other hand, section 80-I (6) deals with determination of the quantum of deduction.  Section 80-I (6) lays down the manner in which the quantum of deduction has to be worked out.  After such computation of the quantum of deduction, one has to go back to section 80-I (1) which categorically states that where the gross total income includes any profits and gains derived from an industrial undertaking to which section 80-I applies then there shall be a deduction from such profits and gains of an amount equal to 20 per cent. The words ‘includes any profits’ used by the Legislature in section 80-I(1) are very important which indicate that the gross total income of an assessee shall include profits from a priority undertaking.  While computing the quantum of deduction under section 80-I(6) the Assessing Officer, no doubt, has to treat the profits derived from an industrial undertaking as the only source of income in order to arrive at the deduction under Chapter VI-A.  However, the non-obstante clause appearing in section 80-I(6), is applicable only to the quantum of deduction, whereas, the gross total income under section 80B(5) which is also  referred to in section 80I(1) is required to be computed in the manner provided under the Act which presupposes that the gross total income shall be arrived at after adjusting the losses of the other division against the profits derived from an industrial undertaking.  If the interpretation as suggested by the assessee was accepted it would almost render the provisions of section 80A(2) nugatory and, therefore, the interpretation canvassed on behalf of the assessee could not be accepted.  It is true that under section 80-I(6) for the purpose of calculating the deduction, the loss sustained in one of the units, cannot be taken into account because sub-section 6 contemplates that only the profits shall be taken into account as if it was the only source of income.  However, section 80A(2) and section 80B (5) are declaratory in nature.  They apply to all the sections falling in Chapter VI-A.  They impose a ceiling on the total amount of deduction and, therefore, the non-obstante clause in section 80-I(6) cannot restrict the operation of sections 80A(2) and 80B(5) which operate in different spheres.  As observed earlier section 80-I(6) deals with actual computation of deduction whereas section 80-I(1) deals with the treatment to be given to such deductions in order to arrive at the total income of the assessee and, therefore, while interpreting section 80-I(1), which also refers to gross total income one has to read the expression 'gross total income' as defined in section 80B(5).  Therefore, the High Court was justified in holding that the loss from the oil division was required to be adjusted before determining the gross total income and as the gross total income was 'nil',  the assessee was not entitled to claim deduction under Chapter VI-A which includes section 80-I also.  [Para 12]

The proposition of law, is that the gross total income of the assessee has first got to be determined after adjusting losses etc., and if the gross total income of the assessee is 'nil', the assessee would not be entitled to deductions under Chapter VI-A.   [Para 13]

Therefore, the appeals filed by the assessee had no substance and same were to be dismissed.   [Para 14

 

CASE REVIEW :

Synco Industries Ltd. v. Assessing Officer [2001] 119 Taxman 503 (Bom.) affirmed.