COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATIALA. V. M/S NAHAR SPINNING MILLS (P) LTD., PATIALA

ITR/16/2011

AI Insights

The case revolves around the taxation of cash incentives and duty drawbacks claimed by M/s Nahar Spinning Mills (P) Ltd., which were not actually received but claimed in the assessment years 1983-84 and adjusted in 1986-87. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal referred the question of whether such amounts are taxable under the Income Tax Act before actual receipt and quantification. The High Court, referencing earlier decisions, concluded that these amounts are not taxable until they are quantified and verified, thus answering the question in favor of the respondent, M/s Nahar Spinning Mills (P) Ltd.

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 733495 (HC-CHANDIGARH)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 04-11-2014
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: ITC No.184 of 1994, Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Manav Tolls (India) P. Ltd
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: SANJAY BANSAL; RAJNI PAL
• Assessee Lawyers: RAJESH KATOCH
• Keywords: Cash incentive; Duty Draw Back; Export incentive; Income tax appellate tribunal; Taxable

Judgement Text

"ITR No.16 of 2011 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITR No.16 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: 04.11.2014 Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala ... Appellant Vs. M/s Nahar Spinning Mills (P) Ltd. ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL Present: Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Sanjay Bansal, Senior Advocate with Ms. Rajni Pal, Advocate for the respondent. RAJIVE BHALLA, J. (ORAL) The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh, has forwarded the following question of law for an answer:- “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the amount on account of cash incentive and duty draw back, though claimed but not received actually by the assessee, would be taxable under the Income Tax Act?” We have heard counsel for the parties. The question referred for an answer came up for consideration in ITC No.184 of 1994 decided on 11.10.2010, which was dismissed by declining the SAVITA DEVI KADIAN 2014.11.17 14:36 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh ITR No.16 of 2011 (O&M) 2 prayer for a reference. The order dated 11.10.2010 reads as follows:- “As regards question (i), view taken by the Tribunal cannot be held to be erroneous. The Tribunal, after examining the scheme for export incentive, found that before quantification based on verification, no income could be held to have accrued to the assessee. There is nothing to dispute this factual aspect. In such a situation, the Tribunal rightly held that no income accrued till claim of the assessee was quantified and verified. We, thus, do not find it necessary to give direction to the Tribunal to refer the said question for opinion of this Court.” The same question came up for consideration in [2011] 336 ITR 237 Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Manav Tolls (India) P. Ltd but was answered against the revenue. Counsel for the revenue is not in a position to distinguish the judgments or to raise any argument that would enable us to record an opinion to the contrary. We, therefore, answer the question of law in terms of order dated 11.10.2011 passed in ITC No.184 of 1994 and opinion recorded in [2011] 336 ITR 237 Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Manav Tolls (India) P. Ltd. At this stage, counsel for the assessee submits that the cash incentive and duty draw back, for assessment year 1983-84, was eventually adjusted in assessment year 1986-87, as set out in SAVITA DEVI KADIAN 2014.11.17 14:36 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh ITR No.16 of 2011 (O&M) 3 order dated 29.03.1988, passed by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Ludhiana. In support of his assertion, counsel for the appellant has filed an affidavit in the Court, which is taken on record. In view of the fact that the question of law has already been answered, against the revenue, the reference is answered against the revenue in terms of order dated 11.10.2011 passed in ITC No.184 of 1994 and opinion recorded in [2011] 336 ITR 237 Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Manav Tolls (India) P. Ltd. Disposed of accordingly. (RAJIVE BHALLA) JUDGE (AMIT RAWAL) JUDGE November 04, 2014 savita SAVITA DEVI KADIAN 2014.11.17 14:36 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh "