1 hr ago
Supreme Court Says CBDT Circulars Cannot Override Income Tax Act
The Central Board of Direct Taxes can tell tax officers how to administer tax rules.
Tax officers generally have to follow those instructions when they are legally valid.
However, a circular cannot change a law passed by Parliament.
Courts are not required to follow a CBDT interpretation if the law means something different.
This issue arose in a case involving garment exporter Orient Crafts.
The company had received money from selling export quotas and claimed it should count toward a tax deduction.
The Supreme Court rejected the company’s appeals.
It said the lower authorities’ position should remain in place.
The Supreme Court ruled that CBDT instructions bind tax officials but not courts interpreting the Income Tax Act.
The decision arose from Orient Crafts Ltd.’s dispute over ₹73.49 lakh received from selling export quotas.
Orient Crafts treated the export-quota premium as business profit for its Section 80HHC deduction claim.
The Court held that Section 263 revision requires an assessment to be both erroneous and prejudicial to Revenue interests.
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals and upheld the position of the lower authorities.
- Who
- The Supreme Court, Orient Crafts Ltd., the Central Board of Direct Taxes, and the Income Tax Department.
- What
- The Court ruled that CBDT instructions can bind tax officials but cannot control judicial interpretation of the Income Tax Act.
- Where
- The dispute was decided by the Supreme Court in Orient Crafts Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi.
- When
- The judgment was delivered on September 18, 2026, concerning assessment years 2000-01 and 2001-02.
- Why
- The case concerned the tax treatment of export-quota sale proceeds and the Commissioner’s revisionary powers under Section 263.
Taxpayer’s Position
Court and Revenue Position
Effect of the CBDT memorandum
Taxpayer’s Position
Orient Crafts relied on the February 23, 1998 CBDT Office Memorandum to support treating export-quota premium similarly to certain export incentives under Section 28.
Court and Revenue Position
The Supreme Court held that the memorandum binds Income Tax Department officers within its legal scope but does not bind courts interpreting the statute.
Treatment of export-quota premium
Taxpayer’s Position
Orient Crafts treated the ₹73.49 lakh premium as business profits when calculating its Section 80HHC deduction.
Court and Revenue Position
The Court found no basis to interfere with the High Court and lower authorities’ position and dismissed the appeals.
Key facts
- Case
- Orient Crafts Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi
- Judgment date
- September 18, 2026
- Case citation
- 2026 INSC 1018
- Amount disputed
- ₹73.49 lakh received as premium from selling export quotas
- Relevant provisions
- Sections 80HHC, 263, and 28 of the Income Tax Act
- Court outcome
- Appeals dismissed; lower authorities’ position upheld
- CBDT instruction
- Office Memorandum dated February 23, 1998
Quotes
Supreme Court of India
The court that decided the Orient Crafts tax dispute
“The CBDT O.M. is not binding on the Courts.”
financialexpress.com
Sources
Related news
ITAT Chandigarh Deletes ₹26.69 Lakh Tax Demand After Filing Error
CBDT Removes Arrest Provisions From Tax Recovery Rules
Supreme Court Stays Ruling Against Income Tax Section 147A
ITAT Deletes ₹26.69 Lakh Demand After Wrong ITR Form
High Court Strikes Down Tax Reassessment Provision After Lawyer’s Fight
ITAT Upholds Section 87A Rebate on Short-Term Gains
Madhya Pradesh High Court Reconsiders OBC Creamy Layer Application
Supreme Court Warns Elected Leaders Against Attacking Doctors
Supreme Court Cancels Bail Over Assault on Hospital Doctors
Debate Over Ballot Papers, EVMs and Election Trust Continues
