Holding

An assessment year is a standard twelve‑month period commencing on 1 April each year and exists irrespective of the assessee’s previous year; consequently the unabsorbed development rebate and deduction may be carried forward only for the statutorily prescribed eight and four assessment years respectively.

Summary

Premier Cable Co. Ltd installed machinery in the previous year relevant to assessment year (AY) 1967‑68 and, under sections 33 and 80J of the Income‑Tax Act, was entitled to carry forward unabsorbed development rebate for eight assessment years and unabsorbed deduction for four assessment years. The company altered its accounting year, causing the profits for the period 1 April 1974‑30 September 1975 to be assessed in AY 1976‑77. The assessing officer allowed the carry‑forward of the rebate and deduction beyond the statutory periods up to AY 1976‑77, but the Commissioner, invoking section 263, reopened the order and disallowed the extension. The company appealed, contending that because it had no previous year relevant to AY 1975‑76, that assessment year did not exist and the carry‑forward period should be extended. The Supreme Court held that an assessment year is a fixed twelve‑month period from 1 April to 31 March, irrespective of the assessee’s accounting year or the existence of a previous year, and therefore the statutory limits of eight and four assessment years cannot be extended. The appeals were dismissed.

Issues considered

Whether the Commissioner had jurisdiction under section 263 to revise the assessment order.
Whether AY 1975‑76 is the eighth assessment year succeeding AY 1967‑68 for the purpose of section 33 carry‑forward.
Whether AY 1975‑76 is the fourth assessment year succeeding AY 1971‑72 for the purpose of section 80J carry‑forward.
Whether, due to the change in accounting year, AY 1975‑76 can be said not to exist for the assessee.
Whether the assessee is entitled to deduction of provision for gratuity.

Legislation cited

Income Tax Act, 1961s. 144B, s. 263(1), s. 2(9), s. 3, s. 33, s. 4, s. 80J

Subjects

Assessment yearIncome taxSection 33Section 80JCarry forwardDevelopment rebateAccounting year changeSection 263Previous year

Judgment

PREMIER CABLE CO. LTD. A
~ v.
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COCHIN

MARCH 23, 1999

[S.P. BHARUCHA AND R.C. LAHOTI, JJ.] B

Income Tax Act, 1961-Ss. 2(9), 33 and 80-J-Assessment year-
Determination of-Installation of machinery-Development rebate and
deductions-Entitlement to carry forward for a period of 8 and 4 Assessment
Years-Change in the accounting year-No previous year relevant to the c
- Assessment year-Effect of-Whether assessee entitled to extend period of
Assessment year for carrying forward development rebate and deductions?
, Held; No, Assessment year is a standard period of twelve months which is
invariable-Assessee not having any previous year relevant to the Assessment
year tzas no consequence in calculating the Assessment periods for deductions D
and rebate.

Words & Phrases:

''Assessment year' '-Meaning and scope of in the context of Sec. 2(9)
of the Income Tax Act, 1961. E

Appellant-assessee, installed machinery in the previous year relevant
to the Assessment year 1967-68. Under Ss. 33 and 80-J of the Income Tax
Act, 1961, assessee was entitled to carry forward the unabsorbed development
rebate and deduction for a period of 8 and 4 Assessment years respectively. F
On assessee's request, the accounting year was changed from the year
.. ending 31st March to the year ending 31st September. Consequently, the
Income-Tax Officer, passed an assessment order allowing the assessee to
carry forward the unabsorbed development rebate and deduction beyond the
period of8 and 4 Assessment years to the Assessment year 1976-77. However,
the Commissioner of Income-Tax, by reopening the said assessment order, G
disallowed the extension of Assessment period. Assessee unsuccessfully
challenged the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax before Appellate
Tribunal and High Court. Hence the present appeals.

On behalf of appellant it was contended that due to change in the H
143
144 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1999] 2 S.C.R.

A accounting year it had no previous year r~levant to the Assessment year
1975-76 and that, therefore, it had no Assessment year 1975-76. Thus, it
was entitled to carry forward the unabsorboo development rebate and deduction
for 8 and 4 Assessment years respectively to the Assessment year 1976-77.

Dismissing the appeals, this Court
B
HELD: 1.1. Appellant-assessee was not entitled to carry forward under
sections 33 and 80J of the Income Tax Act, 1961 the unabsorbed development
rebate and deductions to an extended period of Assessment year 1976-77, on
the ground that there was no previous year relevant to the Assessment year.
-..
C (148-E-G]

1.2. Section 2(9) of the Act defines the Assessment year to be the
period of 12 months commencing on the first day of April every year. It is
..
...
a standard period of 12 months commencing on lst April of every year. It
does not depend upon one or other assessee and whether or not he had a
D ·previous year relevant to a particular Assessment year. It is as invariable
as ~he calendar year. The "assessment year mentioned in section 33 and 80J
must be read in this light The unabsorbed development rebate under section
33 and the unasbsorbed deduction under section 80J may be carried forward
only for the 8 and 4 Assessment years respectively that follow the Assessment
E year relevant to the previous year in which the said development rebate and
deduction were first earned. The fact that, in the instant case, the asessee
did not have a previous year relevant to a particular Assessment year that
fell within these spans of 8 and 4 Assessment years respectively is of no
consequence to the calculation of the periods for which the aforesaid
F development rebate and deduction can be carried forward.
(149-G-H; 150-A-B]

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal Nos. 393-94 of
1992.

G From the Judgment and Order dated 3.5.91 of the Kerala High Court in
l.T.R. Nos. 417/82 and 375of1985.

T.L.V. Iyer, Mrs. A.K. Verma and M/s J.B.D. & Co. for the Appellant.

Ranbir Chandera, Mrs. Neeru Gupta and B.K. Prasad for the Respondent.

H The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
PREMIER CABLE CO. LTD. v. C.I.T. [BHARUCHA, J.] 145
BHARUCHA, J. The basic questions with which we are concerned in A
,. these appeals, relating to the Assesssment Year 1976-77, read thus:

"(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, was
the Tribunal right in holding that the Commissioner of Income Tax had
jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act to revise the order of the B
Income Tax Officer passed after obtaining directions from the Inspecting
Assistant Commissioner under sec. 144B of the Act ?

(ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, was
the Appellate Tribunal right in law in holding that assessment year
1975-76 is the 8th assessment year immediately succeeding the C
assessment year 1967-68 for the purpose of carry forward and set off
of unabsorbed development rebate under section 33(2)(ii) of the Act
and not the assessment year 1976-77 ?

(iii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, was
the Appellate Tribunal right in holding that for the purpose of carry D
forward of 80J relief the assessment year 1975-76 is the 4th assessment
year immediately succeeding the assessment year 1971-72 and not the
assessment year 1976-77 ?

(iv) Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that as far as the E
assessee was concerned it cannot be said that the assessment year
1975-76 did not exist or was not there?

(v) Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the applicant is not
entitled to deduction of provision for gratuity ?"

Learned counsel for the assessee has not pressed any argument in
F
relation to questions l and 5 and, therefore, we do not dcai therewith.

For the purposes of questions 2, 3 and 4, Sections 33 and 80J need to
be quoted :

"33. Development rebate : - (l)(a) In respect of a new ship or new
G
machinery or plant (other than office appliances or road transport
vehicles) which is owned by the assessee and his wholly used for the
purposes of the business carried on by him, there shall, in accordance
with and subject to the provisions of this section and of section 34,
be allowed a deduction, in respect of the previous year in which the H
146 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1999] 2 S.C.R.

A ship was acquired or the machinery or plant was installed or, if the
ship, machinery or plant is first put to use in the immediately succeeding
previous year then, in respect of that previous year, a sum by way of
development rebate as specified in clause (b ).

xx xx xx
B
(2) In the case of a ship acquired or machinery or plant installed after
the 3 l~t day of December, 1957, where the total income of the assessee
assessable for the assessment year relevant to the previous year in
which the ship was acquired or the machinery or plant installed or the
c immediately succeeding previous year, as the case may be (the total
income for this purpose being computed without making any allowance
under sub-section (I) or sub-section (IA) of this section or sub-
section (I) of section 33A or any deduction under Chapter VI-A or
section 280-0 is nil or is less than the full amount of the development '
.
rebate calculated at the rate applicable thereto under sub-section (I)
D or sub-section (IA), as the case may be:-

(i) the sum to be allowed by way of development rate for that
assessment year under sub-section (I) or sub-section (IA) shall be
only such amounts as is sufficient to reduce the said total income to
E nil; and

(ii) the amount of the development rebate to the extent to which it has
not been allowed as aforesaid, shall be carried forward to the following
assessment year, and the development rebate to be allowed for the
following assessment year shall be such amount as is sufficient to
F reduce the total income of the assessee assessable for that assessment
year, computed in the manner aforesaid, to nil, and the balance of the
development rebate, if any still outstanding shall be carried forward
to the following assessment year and so on, so however, that no
portion of the development rebate shall be carried forward for more
G than eight assessment years immediately succeeding the assessment
year relevant to the previous year in which the ship was acquired of ,..
the machinery or plant installed or the immediately succeeding previous
year, as the case may be."

"80J. Deduction in respect ofprofits and gains from newly established
H industrial undertaking or ship or hotel business in certain cases.- (I)
PREMIER CABLE CO. LTD. v. C.I.T. [BHARUCHA, J.] 147
Where the gross total income of an assessee includes any profits and A
gains derived from an industrial undertaking on a ship or the business
of a hotel, to which this section applies, there shall, in accordance
with and subject to the provisions of this section, be allowed, in
computing the total income of the assessment a deduction from such
profits and gains (reduced by the deduction, if any, admissible to the B
assessee under section 80HH) of so much of the amount thereof as
does not exceed the amount calculated at the rate of six per cent, per
annum on the capital employed in the industrial undertaking or ship
or business ofthe hotel, as the case may be computed in the prescribed
manner in respect of the previous year relevant to the assessment
year (the amount calculated as aforesaid being hereinafter, in this C
section, referred to as the relevant amount of capital employed during
the previous year.)

Provided that in relation to the profits and gains derived by an
assesee, being a company from an industrial undertaking which begins D
to manufacture or produce articles or to operate its cold storage plant
or plants after the 31st day of March, 1976, or from a ship which is
first brought into use after that date, or from the business of a hotel
which starts functioning after that date, the provisions of this sub-
section shall have effect as if for the words 'six per cent,' the words E
'seven and a half per cent', had been substituted.

(2) The deduction specified in sub-section (1) shall be allowed in
computing the total income in respect of the assessment year relevant
to the previous year in which the industrial undertaking begins to
.manufacture or produce articles or to operate its cold storage plant or F
plants or the ship is first brought into use or the business of the hotel
starts functioning (such assessment year being hereafter, in this section,
referred to as the initial assessment year) and each of the four
assessment years immediately succeeding the initial assessment year. "
(Emphasis supplied) G
The assessee had installed machinery in the previous year relevant to
· the Assessment Year 1967-68. Under the terms of Section 33 it was entitled
to carry forward the unabsorbed development rebate in this behalf for a
period of "8 years immediately succeeding the assessment year relevant to
the previous year." Ordinarily, therefore, it was entitled to carry forward the H
148 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1999] 2 S.C.R.

A unabsorbed development rebate upto the Assessment Year 1975-76. Similarly,
for the purpose of the deduction under Section 80-J, the assessee was entitled -·
to carry forward the unabsorbed deduction, which it had earned in the previous
year relevant to the Assessment Year 1971-72, upto the Assessment year
1975-76.
B Now, the assessee had by its letter dated 2 lst April, 1975, requested
that its accounting year be changed from the year ending 31st March to the
year ending 31st September. The Income-Tax Officer informed the assessee
that its request was granted "subj~ct to the condition that the profits for the
18 months from 1.4.74 to 30.9.75 will be assessed in the Assessment Year
C 1976-77." An assessment for the Assessment Year 1976-77, the previous year
whereof commended on 1st April, 1974 and ended on 30th September, 1975,
was made after the procedure under Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961,
had been followed. The order of assessment was reopened by the
_Commissioner oflncome Tax under Section 263(1). The commissioner took the
D view that the assessment order was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest
of the Revenue inasmuch as, among other things, the assessee had been
allowed to carry forward the unabosorbed development rebate under Section
33 beyond the period of 8 Assessment Years to the Assessment Year 1976-
77 and the unabsorbed deduction under Section 80J beyond the period of 4
Assessment Years also to the Assessment year 1976-77. The assessee appealed
E against the order of the Commissioner and the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal
dismissed the appeal. Arising out of the order of the Tribunal, the foregoing
questions were referred to the High Court for consideration. The High Court
answered the questions against the assessee.

F The argument on behalf of the assessee is that, by reason of the change
in its accounting year as aforestated, the assessee had had no previous year
relevant to the Assessment year 197 5-76 and that, therefore, it had no
Assessment Year 1975-76. Accordingly, it was entitled to carry forward the
aforesaid unabsorbed development rebate and deduction for 8 and 4
G Assessment Years respectively to the Assessment year 1976-77.

Reference was made by learned counsel for the appellant to the
provisions of Section 2(9) which defines 'Assessment Year' to mean the
period of 12 months commencing on the first day of April every year, to the
provisions of Section 3 whereunder a 'Previous Year' is defined to be the
H financial year immediately preceding the. Assessment year; and to the
PREMIER CABLE CO.LTD. v. C.I.T. [BHARUCHA, J.] 149

provisions of Section 4 which deals with the charge of income tax and reads A
thus :

"Charge of income-tax.

4(1) Where any Central Act enacts the income-tax shall be charged for
any assessment year at any rate or rates, income-tax at that rate or B
those rates shall be charged for that year in accordance with, and
subject to the provisions (including provisions for the levy of
additional income-tax) of, this Act in respect of the total income of
the previous year of every person :
'·
Provided that where by virtue of any provision of this Act income- C
tax is to be charged in respect of the income of a period other than
the previous year, income-tax shall be charged accordingly.

(2) In respect of income chargeable under sub-section (1), income-
tax shall be deducted at the source or paid in advance, where it is so D
deductible or payable under any provision of this Act.
Learned counsel's argument was that under the provisions of Section
4, the charge for the levy of income tax was imposed on a person in respect
to his previous year and that, therefore, if an assessee had had no particular
previous year, there was no Assessment Year which could be related to it. In E
the instant case, according to learned counsel, the assessee had had no
previous year relevant to the Assessment Year 1975-76. It had had therefore,
no such Assessment Year and, accordingly, in calculating the period of 8 and
4 Assessment Years respectively for the carry-forward of the aforesaid
unabsorbed development rebate and deduction the Assessment Year 1975-76
was not to be considered and these periods had to extend to the Assessment F
Year 1976-77.

We find it difficult to agree. Section 2(9) defines the Assessment Year
to be the period of 12 months commencing on the first day of April every
year. It is a standard period of 12 months commencing on lst April of every
year. It does not depend upon one or other assessee and whether or not he G
had a previous year relevant to a particular Assessment Year. It is as invariable
as the calendar year. The "assessment years" mentioned in Sections 33 and
801 must be read in this light. The unabsorbed development rebate under
Section 33 and the unabsorbed deduction under Section 801 may be carried
forward only for the 8 and 4 Assessment Years respectively that follow the J-t
150 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1999] 2 S.C.R.

,, A Assessment Year relevant to the previous year in which the said development
rebate and deduction were first earned. The fact that, in the instant case, the
assessee did not have a previous year relevant to a particular Assessment
Year that fell within these spans of 8 and 4 Assessment Years respectively
is of no consequence to the calculation of the periods for which the aforesaid
B development rebate and deduction can be carried forward.

We are in agreement with the High Court in the view that it took in
answering questions 2, 3 and 4 against the assessee.

The appeals are dismissed. No order as to costs.
c S.V.K.I. Appeals dismissed.