The Supreme Court examined whether gains arising from foreign exchange fluctuations in the Exchange Earners’ Foreign Currency (EEFC) account of an assessee constitute profits derived from the export business and are therefore eligible for deduction under Section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

The assessee, a 100% Export Oriented Unit engaged in the export of garments, received foreign exchange remittances against completed export transactions. Instead of converting the entire foreign exchange into Indian currency immediately upon receipt, the assessee credited a permitted portion of the foreign exchange into its EEFC account in accordance with the Reserve Bank of India notification. Due to appreciation in the exchange rate at the end of the financial year, the assessee earned gains from foreign exchange fluctuation and claimed deduction of such gains under Section 80HHC of the Act.

The Revenue disallowed the deduction on the ground that the gain from foreign exchange fluctuation in the EEFC account was not derived from the export of goods or merchandise outside India. The High Court upheld the disallowance, leading to the appeal before the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court held that Section 80HHC permits deduction only of profits derived from the export of goods or merchandise. Emphasising the settled principle that the expression “derived from” has a narrow and restrictive meaning, the Court reiterated that there must be a direct and proximate nexus between the profit and the export activity. The Court distinguished between income “derived from” an activity and income merely “attributable to” it.

The Court observed that maintaining an EEFC account is not a mandatory or integral requirement for carrying on export business but is merely an enabling facility provided by the Reserve Bank of India. The gain arising from foreign exchange fluctuation in such an account is independent of the export transaction, as the export is complete upon receipt of foreign exchange. The subsequent decision to retain foreign currency in an EEFC account and the resulting fluctuation gain do not have a direct nexus with the export of goods.

Relying upon earlier decisions including Pandian Chemicals Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Sterling Foods v. Commissioner of Income Tax, and other authorities interpreting the expression “derived from”, the Court held that such foreign exchange fluctuation gains cannot be regarded as profits derived from export business. The Court also distinguished Topman Exports v. Commissioner of Income Tax, noting that the said decision dealt with statutory export incentives and was not applicable to gains arising from optional foreign currency retention.

Accordingly, the Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the High Court and held that gains from foreign exchange fluctuations in the EEFC account are not eligible for deduction under Section 80HHC of the Act, and dismissed the appeals.

Source Link - https://api.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2010/27756/27756_2010_3_1501_48355_Judgement_21-Nov-2023.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.