Case: Oil &amp; Natural Gas Corp. Ltd Vs. Commnr. Of Income Tax

2. The question posing for an answer revolves around the true and correct purport and effect of exemption notification bearing No.GSR 307(E) dated 31.03.1983 issued under Section 24AA of the Surtax Act. For a quick understanding of the question that arise for consideration, the provisions of Section 24-AA of the Surtax Act and the contents of the notification bearing No.GSR 307(E) may be extracted below :Power to make exemption, etc., in relation to participation in the business of prospecting for, extraction, etc., of mineral oils(1) If the Central Government is satisfied that it is necessary or expedient so to do in the public interest, it may, by notification in the official Gazette, make in exemption, reduction in rate or other modification in respect of surtax in favour of any class of foreign companies specified in sub-section (2) or in regard to the whole or any part of the profits chargeable of such class of companiesExplanation.-For the purposes, of this sub-section, "foreign company" shall have the meaning assigned to it in clause (4) of section 80B of the Income-tax Act(2)The foreign companies referred to in sub-section (1) are the following, namely:-(a) foreign companies with whom the Central Government has entered into agreements for the association or participation of that Government or any person authorized by that Government in any business consisting of the prospecting for or extraction or production of mineral oils; and(b) foreign companies providing any services or facilities or supplying any ship, aircraft, machinery or plant (whether by way of sale or hire) in connection with any business consisting of the prospecting for or extraction or production of mineral oils carried on by that Government or any person specified by that Government in this behalf by notification in the official Gazette(3) Every notification issued under this section shall be laid before each House of ParliamentNo. 307(E) - Exemption from surtax of foreign companies with whom Central Government has enteExemption from surtax of foreign companies with whom Central Government has entered into agreements for participation in business of prospecting for or extraction of mineral oils-Notification issued under sub-section (1) Whereas the Central Government is satisfied that it is necessary and expedient in the public interest to make an exemption in respect of surtax in favour of foreign companies with whom the Central Government has entered into agreements for the association or participation of that Government or any person authorised by that Government in any business consisting of the prospecting for or extraction or production of mineral oils;Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by section 24AA of the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964 (7 of 1964), the Central Government hereby provides that no surtax shall be payable by such foreign companiesExplanation : For the purposes of this notification :(a) "foreign company" shall have the meaning assigned to it in clause (4) of section 80B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961);(b) "mineral oil" includes petroleum and natural gas3. Section 24-AA of the Surtax Act, as it would appear, vests in the Central Government the power to make exemption, reduction in rate or other modification in respect of Surtax in favour of any class of foreign companies which are specified in sub-section (2), in regard to the whole or any part of the chargeable profits liable to tax under the Surtax Act. Sub-section (2) of Section 24-AA refers to two categories of foreign companies. The first is foreign companies with whom the Central Government has entered into agreements for association or participation, including participation by any authorized person, in any business consisting of the prospecting or extraction or production of mineral oils. The second category of foreign companies mentioned in sub-section (2) is foreign companies that may be providing services or facilities or supplying any ship, aircraft, machinery or plant in connection with any business of prospecting or extraction or production of mineral oils carried on by the Central Government or any authorized person. Specifically the Section states that mineral oils will include petroleum and natural gas4. The exemption notification bearing No.GSR 307(E) dated 31.3.1983, as it has been noticed, specifically grants exemption in respect of surtax in favour of foreign companies with whom the Central Government has entered into agreements for association or participation of that Government or any authorized person in the business of prospecting or extraction or production of mineral oils5. In the present appeals, the ONGC had executed agreements with different foreign companies for services or facilities or for supply of ship, aircraft, machinery and plant, as may be, all of which were to be used in connection with the prospecting or extraction or production of mineral oils. Such agreements do not contemplate a direct association or participation of the ONGC (a person authorized by the Central Government by notification dated 2.8.1989) in the prospecting or extraction or production of mineral oils but involved the taking of services and facilities or use of plant or machinery which is connected with the business of prospecting or extraction or production of mineral oils6. In the above situation, the primary authority took the view that the agreements executed by the ONGC with the foreign companies being for services to be rendered and such agreements not being for association or participation in the prospecting or extraction or production of mineral oils, would not be covered by the exemption notification in question which by its very language granted exemption only to foreign companies with whom there were agreements for participation by the Central Government or the person authorized in the business of prospecting, extraction or production of mineral oils. The agreements in question, according to assessing authority, were, thereforeand hence covered by sub-section 2(b) of Section 24-AA of the Surtax Act and were accordingly beyond the purview of the exemption notification7. The said view was reversed by the learned Appellate Commissioner and upheld by the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. In the appeal under Section 260A of the Act, the High Court of Uttarakhand in the lead case (CA No.730 of 2007) overturned the view taken by the Appellate Commissioner and the learned Tribunal leading to the institution of the present appeal by the aggrieved representative assessee i.e. the ONGC

Reasoning:
Section 24AA of the Surtax Actvests power in Central Government, inter alia, to grant exemption to foreign companies with whom agreements have been executed by the Central Government for association or participation in the prospecting or extraction or production of mineral oils and also to foreign companies who are providing support services or facilities or making available plant and machinery in connection with the business of prospecting or extraction or production of mineral oils in which the Central Government or an authorized person is associated. In other words, the power to grant exemption isd and covers agreements directly associated with the prospecting or extraction or production of mineral oils or contracts facilitating or making available services in connection with such a business. There is nothing in the provisions of the Act which could have debarred the Central Government from granting exemptions to both categories of foreign companies mentioned above or to confine the grant of exemption to any one or a specified category of foreign companies. Reading the notification No.GSR 307(E) dated 31.3.1983 it clearly appears that the exemption has been granted only to foreign companies with whom the Central Government had executed agreements for direct association or participation by the Central Government or the persons authorized by it (ONGC) in the prospecting or extraction or production of mineral oils. In other words, the exemption notification confines or restricts the scope of the exemption to only one category of foreign companies which has been specifically enumerated inn 2(a) of Section24AA of the SurtaxAct. The second category of foreign companies that may be providing services as enumerated inn 2(b) of Section24AAis specifically omitted in the exemption notification. The power under Section24AAof the Surtax Act, as already noticed, is wide enough to include even this category of foreign companies. The omission of this particular category of foreign companies in the exemption notification, notwithstanding the wide amplitude and availability of the power under Section, clearly reflects a conscious decision on the part of the Central Government to confine the scope of the exemption notification to only those foreign companies that are enumerated in and covered byn 2(a) of Section24AAof the Surtax Act13. Section24AAof the Surtax Actwas brought into the statute book by Act 16 of 1981 i.e. Finance Act, 1981 with effect from 1.4.1981. The explanatory notes on the provisions of Finance Act [Paragraph 11(4) and 26(1)] clearly goes to show that the legislative intent behind inclusion of Section24AAis to encourage foreign companies to enter into participating contracts with the Union Government in the business of oil exploration or production. The further legislative intent was to seek greater participation of foreign companies in the matter of providing services including supply of ships, aircrafts, machinery or plant in connection with business of extraction or production of mineral oils. The aforesaid legislative intent which isd is manifested by the two limbs ofn 2 ofSection24AAof the Surtax Actto which the power of exemption was intended to operate i.e.n 2(a) and 2(b) ofSection. If out of the two limbs where the power of exemption was intended to operate, the repository of the power i.e. Central Government, had consciously chosen to grant exemption in one particular field i.e. foreign companies covered byn 2(a) ofSection, the scope of the grant cannot be enhanced or expanded by a judicial pronouncement which is what the arguments made on behalf of the appellants intend to achieve. Any such interpretation must, therefore, be avoided. Consequently, we see no reason to depart from the basic principles of interpretation, as already noticed, that should govern the present issue.