Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: export duty in Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs Addl. Cit, New Delhi on 12 March, 2024Matching Fragments
19. The co-ordinate bench in ITA No. 467/DEL/2014 for A.Y 2009-10 has considered this issue at Para 16 of its order. The relevant findings read as under:
"16. As regards to Ground No. 3.5, relating to Customs Duty paid on import of components for export purposes for which exports has been made. The assessee has been consistently following exclusive method of accounting in respect of custom duty paid on import of components for export purposes. Accordingly, duties paid on purchases are not included in the cost of purchases and the value of closing stock in the profit and loss account. Addition of the duty, both in the purchases as well as the closing stock as per the requirement of section 145A, is tax neutral inasmuch as the same amount is both debited as well as credited to the profit and loss account. However, to give effect to the provisions of section 43B, which mandates that duties paid by the assessee are allowable only on payment basis, custom duty paid by the assessee on import of components for export purposes, whether or not export against the same had actually taken place during the relevant year, is claimed as deduction in the return of income. The Assessing Officer, disallowed the same following the Assessment Order for the assessment year 2005-06, wherein it was held that since the assessee is entitled for duty drawback, which becomes immediately due on the date of export, the amount of custom duty on import is revenue neutral. Consequently, no deduction is allowable to the assessee in respect of the same.
17. The Ld. AR submitted that assessing officer failed to appreciate that Duty drawback does not accrue automatically on export of goods since the exporter is required to fulfill various conditions/ requirements in order to claim the same. Duty drawback accrues only when the claim of the exporter-assessee is sanctioned by the custom authorities; Duty drawback receivable is separately chargeable to tax as income of the assessee under section 28 of the Act. Receipt of duty drawback is altogether different from allowability of deduction in respect of which duty paid by the assessee on payment basis under section 43B of the Act. The Ld. AR further submitted that without prejudice to the aforesaid, in case the assessing officer's contention were to be accepted, then duty drawback income amounting to Rs. 15,93,11,093/- declared by the assessee himself, being the amount of duty drawback received in the instant year but which allegedly accrued in the previous year, as per the principle adopted by the assessing officer is not taxable in the year under consideration. The Ld. AR submitted that there is no justification for adopting two different and inconsistent methods while computing the income of the present year. The aforesaid sum was duly declared as the income of the immediately succeeding year on receipt, a method consistently adopted by the assessee company and accepted by the AO since inception. The Tribunal has decided the aforesaid issue in favour of assessee in the assessment years 1999-00, 2000-01, 2001- 02, 2002-03, 2004-05, 2005-06, AY 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2008-09. The orders of the Delhi Tribunal have been affirmed by the Delhi High Court for assessment years 1999-00 (ITA No.250/2005), 2000- 01 (ITA No.976/2005), 2005-06 (ITA Nos. 171 and 172/2012) and 2006-07 (ITA No. 381/2016). Further, the issue stand covered in favour of the assessee in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of CIT v. Sriyansh Knitters P. Ltd. 336 ITR 235 wherein the High Court, while affirming the finding of the Tribunal held that duty drawback accrues in the year in which rate is fixed by the competent authority after verification of claim of the assessee and amount is quantified and not in the year of export. Similar view has been held in the case of CIT v. Manav Tools (India) P. Ltd: 336 ITR 237 (P&H). It has been held similarly by the Delhi High Court in assessee's own case for assessment years 1994-95, 1995-96, 1996-97, 1997-98, 1998-99, 1999-00, 2001-02 and 2004-05.
63. In A.Y 2009-10, this Tribunal has considered this issue at Para 16 of its order. The relevant findings read as under:
"16. As regards to Ground No. 3.5, relating to Customs Duty paid on import of components for export purposes for which exports has been made. The assessee has been consistently following exclusive method of accounting in respect of custom duty paid on import of components for export purposes. Accordingly, duties paid on purchases are not included in the cost of purchases and the value of closing stock in the profit and loss account. Addition of the duty, both in the purchases as well as the closing stock as per the requirement of section 145A, is tax neutral inasmuch as the same amount is both debited as well as credited to the profit and loss account. However, to give effect to the provisions of section 43B, which mandates that duties paid by the assessee are allowable only on payment basis, custom duty paid by the assessee on import of components for export purposes, whether or not export against the same had actually taken place during the relevant year, is claimed as deduction in the return of income. The Assessing Officer, disallowed the same following the Assessment Order for the assessment year 2005-06, wherein it was held that since the assessee is entitled for duty drawback, which becomes immediately due on the date of export, the amount of custom duty on import is revenue neutral. Consequently, no deduction is allowable to the assessee in respect of the same.
17. The Ld. AR submitted that assessing officer failed to appreciate that Duty drawback does not accrue automatically on export of goods since the exporter is required to fulfill various conditions/requirements in order to claim the same. Duty drawback accrues only when the claim of the exporter-assessee is sanctioned by the custom authorities; Duty drawback receivable is separately chargeable to tax as income of the assessee under section 28 of the Act. Receipt of duty drawback is altogether different from allowability of deduction in respect of which duty paid by the assessee on payment basis under section 43B of the Act. The Ld. AR further submitted that without prejudice to the aforesaid, in case the assessing officer's contention were to be accepted, then duty drawback income amounting to Rs. 15,93,11,093/- declared by the assessee himself, being the amount of duty drawback received in the instant year but which allegedly accrued in the previous year, as per the principle adopted by the assessing officer is not taxable in the year under consideration. The Ld. AR submitted that there is no justification for adopting two different and inconsistent methods while computing the income of the present year. The aforesaid sum was duly declared as the income of the immediately succeeding year on receipt, a method consistently adopted by the assessee company and accepted by the AO since inception. The Tribunal has decided the aforesaid issue in favour of assessee in the assessment years 1999-00, 2000-01, 2001- 02, 2002-03, 2004-05, 2005-06, AY 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2008-09. The orders of the Delhi Tribunal have been affirmed by the Delhi High Court for assessment years 1999-00 (ITA No.250/2005), 2000-01 (ITA No.976/2005), 2005-06 (ITA Nos. 171 and 172/2012) and 2006-07 (ITA No. 381/2016). Further, the issue stand covered in favour of the assessee in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of CIT v. Sriyansh Knitters P. Ltd. 336 ITR 235 wherein the High Court, while affirming the finding of the Tribunal held that duty drawback accrues in the year in which rate is fixed by the competent authority after verification of claim of the assessee and amount is quantified and not in the year of export. Similar view has been held in the case of CIT v. Manav Tools (India) P. Ltd: 336 ITR 237 (P&H). It has been held similarly by the Delhi High Court in assessee's own case for assessment years 1994-95, 1995-96, 1996-97, 1997-98, 1998-99, 1999-00, 2001-02 and 2004-05.