Facts of the Case
The Revenue filed an appeal under Section 260A of
the Income Tax Act, 1961 challenging the order of the Income Tax Appellate
Tribunal dated 22 August 2008 pertaining to Assessment Year 2003-04.
The Assessing Officer had disallowed a liability
amounting to Rs. 51,78,289/- arising on account of foreign exchange fluctuation
and consequently made an addition to the income of the assessee, Fidelity
Technology India Pvt. Ltd.
The Tribunal deleted the addition and granted
relief to the assessee by following the judgment of the Delhi High Court in CIT
vs. Woodward Governor India (P) Ltd. (2007) 294 ITR 451 (Del.). Aggrieved
by the Tribunal's decision, the Revenue preferred the present appeal before the
Delhi High Court.
Issues
Involved
- Whether the Tribunal erred in law in deleting the addition of Rs.
51,78,289/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of foreign exchange
fluctuation liability.
- Whether foreign exchange fluctuation loss constitutes an allowable
deduction under the Income Tax Act, 1961.
- Whether the issue was already settled by binding judicial
precedents.
Petitioner’s
Arguments (Revenue)
- The Revenue contended that the Tribunal had committed an error in
law by deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer.
- It was argued that the liability claimed on account of foreign
exchange fluctuation should not have been allowed as a deduction.
- The Revenue sought restoration of the addition of Rs. 51,78,289/-.
Respondent’s
Arguments (Assessee)
- The assessee relied upon the decision of the Delhi High Court in CIT
vs. Woodward Governor India (P) Ltd. (2007) 294 ITR 451 (Del.),
wherein foreign exchange fluctuation loss had been recognized and allowed
in accordance with law.
- It was contended that the issue stood covered by binding judicial
precedent and the Tribunal had correctly followed the same.
Court
Findings
The Delhi High Court examined the record and
observed that the Tribunal had decided the matter by relying upon the Division
Bench judgment of the Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Woodward Governor India
(P) Ltd. (2007) 294 ITR 451 (Del.).
The Court further noted that the aforesaid judgment
had subsequently been affirmed by the Supreme Court in CIT vs. Woodward
Governor India (P) Ltd. (2009) 312 ITR 254 (SC).
Since the controversy raised by the Revenue had
already been conclusively settled by the High Court and affirmed by the Supreme
Court, the issue was no longer open to debate and did not give rise to any
substantial question of law.
Court Order
The Delhi High Court held that the issue involved
in the appeal was no longer res integra in view of the binding decisions
in Woodward Governor India (P) Ltd.
Accordingly, the appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed
in limine.
Important
Clarification
- Foreign exchange fluctuation loss, where otherwise allowable under
law, cannot be disallowed merely because the liability arises due to
exchange rate variation.
- Once the legal position has been settled by the Supreme Court in CIT
vs. Woodward Governor India (P) Ltd. (2009) 312 ITR 254 (SC), similar
disputes on the same issue are governed by that precedent.
- A High Court appeal under Section 260A cannot succeed where the
issue is already conclusively settled by binding judicial authority and no
substantial question of law survives.
Relevant
Sections Involved
- Section 260A, Income Tax Act, 1961 – Appeal to High Court.
- Section 37(1), Income Tax Act, 1961 – Allowability of business expenditure.
- Principles relating to foreign exchange fluctuation loss as laid down in judicial precedents.
Link to
Download the Order
https://delhihighcourt.nic.in/app/case_number_pdf/2010:DHC:4671-DB/MMH20092010ITA2772010.pdf
Disclaimer
This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment