SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1984 Supreme(Cal) 79

High Court Of Calcutta
Satish Chandra, Suhas Chandra Sen
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX - Appellant
Versus
KUSUM PRODUCTS LIMITED - Respondent
Income-Tax Reference 226  Of  1981
Decided On : 03/12/1984

Advocates Appeared:
A.K.DEY, M.L.BHATTACHARJI, R.N.BAJORIA, S.K.BAGARIA

Expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business is allowable under Section 37 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Headnote:

INCOME TAX - Expenditure - Premium paid for import entitlements - Allowable expenditure - Assessee purchased import entitlements for import of raw materials - Entire quota not utilized in the year of account - Whether premium paid is an allowable expenditure - Held, yes - Expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business - Import entitlements not saleable - Utilized in subsequent year for trading activities.

Fact of the Case:

The assessee, a company, purchased import entitlements for the import of raw materials. The entire quota was not utilized in the year of account. The ITO disallowed the premium paid on the unutilized import entitlements as an allowable expenditure. The Commissioner (Appeals) deleted the addition. The Tribunal held that the premium paid was an allowable expenditure.

Finding of the Court:

The Tribunal found that the import entitlements were not saleable by the assessee. These had been acquired in the course of the normal trading activities of the company. In no way, could these import entitlements be described to be part of the profit making apparatus of the company.

Issues: Whether the premium paid for import entitlements is an allowable expenditure under Section 37 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Ratio Decidendi: The expenditure was incurred in the process of profit making. The import entitlements that were not used in the relevant year of account were utilized in the subsequent year for the purpose of the trading activities of the company.

Final Decision: The question referred to this court is answered in the affirmative and in favor of the assessee.

SUHAS CHANDRA SEN, J.

( 1 ) THE Tribunal has referred the following question of law under Section 256 (1) of the I. T. Act, 1961, to this court for its opinion:"whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that Rs. 9,54,677 being the premium paid luring the accounting year corresponding to assessment year 1975-76 is an allowable expenditure ?"

( 2 ) THE assessee is a company. The assessment year is 1975-76 for which the accounting year ending is on March 31, 1975, The assessee had debited a sum of Rs. 16,15,458 to the account of premium on purchase of import entitlements for the import of raw materials. The assessee itself did not have any import licence but it purchased the same from other exporters who had been allotted such licences. The entire quota was not utilised in the year of account. Note No. 9 (a) in the balance-sheet, Schedule 'd', for the instant year in this connection was in the following terms :"premium on purchases of import entitlements for import of raw materials aggregating to Rs. 16,15,459 written off in the profit and loss account includes Rs. 9,54,677 being the value of unutilised licences in hand as at March 31, 1975. However, entitlements valued at Rs. 6,58,781 against which goods have already been received have been considered for the valuation of raw materials. "

( 3 ) OUT of the unutilised quota of Rs. 9,54,677, the utilisation was Rs. 4,73,050 in the year 1975-76, Rs. 2,45,248 in the year 1976-77 and Rs. 2,54,641 in the year 1977-78. The balance of Rs. 1,758 could not be utilised as it got time-barred in the accounting year 1977-78. The ITO held that the import licences concerned were saleable and the assessee could sell its import entitlements. Secondly, he held that the amount of premium could be treated as an addition to the cost of the goods to be imported and should be considered as a credit to the profit and loss account as part of the closing stock of the goods. Thirdly, he held that for the purposes of ascertaining the correct profit of the year, such entitlements which were actually utilised for import of raw materials for the business during the year was allowable. In the result, the ITO held that the expenditure incurred to acquire unutilised import entitlements with licence could not be considered to have been incurred for the purpose of the assessee's business during the year and hence the said amount of Rs. 9,54,677 was disallowed by him.

( 4 ) ON appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) held that unutilised import entitlements were not saleable and this could not form part of the raw materials and could not be taken to the trading account nor could it form part of the stock-in-trade of the assessee. The Commissioner (Appeals) further held that in so far as the import entitlements utilised to the extent of Rs. 58,781 were concerned, a sum of Rs. 69,449 representing the value of the entitlements against the imported materials in stock had been taken in the closing stock and the balance had not been included in the consumption of raw materials since the same had already been charged off under the head " Premium on purchase of import entitlements". He held that there was thus no scope to find fault with the method of accounting adopted by the assessee. On the above reasonings, the Commissioner (Appeals) deleted the addition of Rs. 9,54,677.

( 5 ) THE Department appealed to the Tribunal. The Tribunal held that the assessee incurred the expenditure in order to be able to carry on its business and the said expenditure could later accrue to its benefit in the form of stock-in-trade when it actually utilised its quota. In the result, the Tribunal held that Rs. 9,54,677 was an allowable expenditure and dismissed the departmental appeal.

( 6 ) IN our opinion, this case does not present any difficulty. That the amount was spent for the purpose of the assessee's business cannot be disputed. The only question is whether merely because the entire quant





Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top