International Tax Review is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 8 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2023

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Indian court explains how to calculate tax holidays

bangalore-highcourt.jpg

An Indian high court ruling has clarified one of the important issues surrounding tax holiday computation when a holiday period has ended.

The decision of the Karnataka High Court outlines the principles for computing relief under section 10A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Section 10A provides for a five-year total tax holiday to industrial undertakings which manufacture or produce any article and are set up in notified free trade zones.

In a batch of appeals filed by the tax department against Yokogawa India Limited and other related cases, the court ruled that although section 10A has been amended to indicate the tax holiday to be a deduction from the total income as against the exemption, it would need to be read as being a deduction in the computation of total income.

Consequently, it continues to retain the character of an exemption. The profits eligible for relief under section 10A are to be computed, before giving effect to the carry forward and set off provisions under section 72 of the Act.

“The judgment will settle a protracted litigation on the manner of computation of the tax holiday when there are other business losses,” said Gokul Chaudhri of BMR Advisors – Taxand.

Facts

Yokogawa had two separate business divisions, one of which was a unit registered under the Software Technology Park of India scheme. The company had claimed a relief under section 10A of the Act before setting off brought forward losses and depreciation.

However, during the course of the assessment proceedings the assessing officer (AO) held that relief under section 10A is to be provided after setting off all brought forward. Accordingly, the relief under section 10A was recomputed at nil, after setting off the losses under section 72.

On appeal, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT (A)] ruled in favour of the company by holding that total income used in the provisions of section 10A refers to the global income of the company and the income eligible for exemption has to be excluded at source even before arriving at the gross total income. Consequently, losses of a non 10A unit cannot be set off against the income of the 10A unit.

Ruling

The court observed: The scheme of the Act provides for deduction in computing total income, but the Act does not contain any mechanism for any deduction from the total income already computed as provided under the Act.

It was also held that section 10A provides for carry forward of depreciation and business losses relating to any year of the tax holiday period to be set off against income of any year, post the tax holiday period. Thus, the legislative intent was to compute the amount of unabsorbed business loss and depreciation at the end of the tax holiday period separately, to enable its set off after tax holiday period. Reliance was placed on the Bombay High Court decision in Hindustan Unilever Ltd (325 ITR 102).

This ruling was pronounced by a division bench of Justice N Kumar and Justice Ravi Malimath.

Additional reporting from www.taxsutra.com.

more across site & bottom lb ros

More from across our site

COVID-19 and an overworked HMRC may have created the ‘perfect storm’ for reduced prosecutions, according to tax professionals.
Participants in the consultation on the UN secretary-general’s report into international tax cooperation are divided – some believe UN-led structures are the way forward, while others want to improve existing ones. Ralph Cunningham reports.
The German government unveils plans to implement pillar two, while EY is reportedly still divided over ‘Project Everest’.
With the M&A market booming, ITR has partnered with correspondents from firms around the globe to provide a guide to the deal structures being employed and tax authorities' responses.
Xing Hu, partner at Hui Ye Law Firm in Shanghai, looks at the implications of the US Uyghur Forced Labor Protection Act for TP comparability analysis of China.
Karl Berlin talks to Josh White about meeting the Fair Tax standard, the changing burden of country-by-country reporting, and how windfall taxes may hit renewable energy.
Sandy Markwick, head of the Tax Director Network (TDN) at Winmark, looks at the challenges of global mobility for tax management.
Taxpayers should look beyond the headline criteria of the simplification regime to ensure that their arrangements meet the arm’s-length standard, say Alejandro Ces and Mark Seddon of the EY New Zealand transfer pricing team.
In a recent webinar hosted by law firms Greenberg Traurig and Clayton Utz, officials at the IRS and ATO outlined their visions for 2023.
The Asia-Pacific awards research cycle has now begun – don’t miss on this opportunity be recognised in 2023