VittSphere ONE Calculators Blog CA Prabhakar Kumar · FCA · ICAI 560762
Case lawCirculars1974 › Circular No. 154
CBDT circular 5 December 1974

Circular No. 154

Amortisation of cost of production/cost of acquiring distribution rights of films - Assessments of film producers/distributors - General guidelines for allowance thereof

What this is

Circular No. 154 was issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes on 5 December 1974. Its subject is Amortisation of cost of production/cost of acquiring distribution rights of films - Assessments of film producers/distributors - General guidelines for allowance thereof.

This is a clarification. The Board is stating how it reads a provision. That reading binds the department; it does not bind a court, and where the section says otherwise the section wins.

What it does

Gives guidelines for amortising the cost of production of feature films and the cost of acquiring distribution rights, modifying the position taken in Circular No. 92 dated 18-9-1972. Because the final receipts of a film are not always known in the first year, the assessment is to be made provisionally in the first instance, allowing a proportionate part of the cost on an estimate against actual receipts, and adjusted under section 154 once the exploitation period ends, by revising the allowance in the proportion of earnings spread over that period. For producers, the whole cost of production is allowed in the year of release where the picture was fully exploited in that year - for instance where all territories were sold outright in that year, or where a picture sold on a minimum guarantee basis brought in all its collections that year. Where not all territories are sold, the picture is not fully exploited and the entire cost cannot be allowed in the year of release, actual collection being the most reliable test. For distributors, the cost of acquiring the distribution rights is allowed on the basis of collections during the exploitation period, with a provisional first-year assessment on an estimate and final adjustment afterwards under section 154. The worked examples assume an eighteen-month exploitation period, but that period is to be determined by the Income-tax Officer on the facts of each case.

Why it was issued

The Board re-examined the question after a study of the earnings of feature films showed that the final receipts of a picture are not always ascertainable in the first year.

Who it reaches

The provisions it speaks to

Left, the provision of the Income-tax Act, 1961 as the instrument itself names it. Right, the section of the Income-tax Act, 2025 that the department’s own concordance maps it to — which is where the same ground is now covered.
Under the 1961 ActNow
s.154s.287

The instrument, as the Board published it

The words below are the department’s own, reproduced from its published text. Where the department’s copy carried a publisher’s notes after the instrument, those are not reproduced.

Amortisation of cost of production/cost of acquiring distribution rights of films - Assessments of film producers/distributors - General guidelines for allowance thereof

1. Attention is invited to Board’s Circular No. 92, dated l8-9-1972 [Clarification 2], modifying its earlier circulars issued on the above subject.
2. The Board has re-examined the question relating to the amortisation of the cost of production of feature films in the assessments of film producers and distributors. A study of the results of the business earnings of the feature films has revealed that it is not always possible to know the final receipts of any particular film in the first year. Therefore, it would be appropriate to make the assessments on a provisional basis in the first instance by allowing proportionate deduction in respect of cost of production and cost of acquiring distribution rights on an estimated basis. On determination of the final results on the expiry of the exploitation period, the income/loss can be adjusted under section 154 by revising the figure of allowance in respect of cost of production and acquisition of distribution rights in the proportion of the earnings spread over the period of exploitation.
3. By way of a general guideline, in the case of producers the entire cost of production can be allowed in the year of release if the picture was fully exploited in that year. For example, if all the territories have been sold by way of outright sale in the year of release the entire cost of production will be allowed in computing the income of the year of release to the producer. In the case of pictures sold on minimum guarantee (M.G.) basis, if the entire collections have come in the year of release, the full cost of production will similarly be allowed in the year of release, as it can be said that the picture was fully exploited in that year. In cases where all the territories have not been sold either on M.G. basis or on outright sale basis, the picture cannot be said to have been exploited fully in that year and, therefore, the entire cost cannot be allowed in the year of release. For this purpose, the most reliable factor to be taken into account for finding out whether the picture has been fully exploited or not is the actual collection from the film. As the figures of actual collection are not likely to be known in the first year of release, the assessments may be made on a provisional basis in the first year by adopting the actual receipts and allowing a part of cost of production also on an estimated basis taking into consideration future estimated receipts subject to final adjustment after the period of exploitation is over.

4. Three examples are given below by way of illustration of the above guidelines. In these examples, it has been presumed that the period of exploitation runs to 18 months. However, this period has to be determined by the Income-tax Officers with reference to facts of each individual case :

EXAMPLE I

Cost of production

Rs. 50 lakhs

Month of release

September 1970

Accounting year of the assessee for 1971-72 assessment

31-3-1971

- Realisations up to 31-3-1971 (6 months)

Rs. 45 lakhs

- Realisations from 1-4-1971 to 31-3-1972 (12 months)

Rs. 30 lakhs

- Cost to be allowed for the 1971-72 assessment

Rs. 50 lakhs × Rs. 45 lakhs

i.e., Rs. 30 lakhs

Rs. 75 lakhs

- Cost to be allowed for the 1972-73 assessment

Rs. 20 lakhs

EXAMPLE II

Cost of production

Rs. 50 lakhs

Month of release

September 1970

Accounting year of the assessment for 1971-72 assessment

31-3-1971

- Realisations up to 31-3-1971

Rs. 27 lakhs

- Realisations from 1-4-1971 to 31-3-1972

Rs. 18 lakhs

Total

Rs. 45 lakhs

Cost to be allowed in the 1971-72 assessment

Rs. 50 lakhs - Rs. 27 lakhs

i.e., Rs. 30 lakhs

Rs. 45 lakhs

Cost to be allowed in the 1972-73 assessment

Rs. 20 lakhs

EXAMPLE III

Cost of production

Rs. 50 lakhs

Month of release

September 1970

Accounting year of the assessee for 1971-72 assessment

31-3-1971

Realisations up to 31-3-1971

Rs. 40 lakhs

Realisations from 1-4-1971 to 31-3-1972

Nil

In this case, the entire cost will be allowed in the 1971-72 assessment since the entire realisations during the 18-month period were effected before March 31, 1971 itself.
5. In the case of distributors, the entire cost of acquiring the distribution rights may be allowed on the basis of collections during the period of exploitation of the film. As the period of exploitation is likely to exceed one year, the assessment for the first year may be framed provisionally by allowing a part of the cost of distribution rights on an estimated basis against the actual receipts in the year under consideration. The final adjustment in the case of the producer will be made after the exploitation period under section 154. However, if a distributor produces evidence to the satisfaction of the Income-tax Officer that a particular picture has failed at the box office in the year of release itself and there is no possibility of further collection in the following years, the entire cost of acquisition of distribution rights may be allowed in the first year itself.
6. All pending assessments may be regulated in accordance with the guidelines spelt out in this circular. In case where the assessments were completed in accordance with the instructions contained in Board’s Circular No. 92 and the appeals are pending either before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner or the Appellate Tribunal, the Department may agree to such assessment being set aside to be reframed on the basis of the guidelines laid down in this circular and the concerned assessees have agreed to the adoption of such a course of action.
Circular : No. 154 [F. No. 201/5/71-IT(A-II)], dated 5-12-1974.

What to watch

Where you meet it

In a film producer's or distributor's assessment where part of the cost is deferred, and in the later section 154 order revising that allowance.

An example

Ours, not the Board’s: a worked case built from the rule the instrument sets, to show how it falls out.

A picture costing Rs. 50 lakhs is released in September 1970. Realisations to 31 March 1971 are Rs. 45 lakhs and in the following year Rs. 30 lakhs, Rs. 75 lakhs in all. The cost allowed for assessment year 1971-72 is Rs. 50 lakhs multiplied by 45 and divided by 75, that is Rs. 30 lakhs, and the balance of Rs. 20 lakhs falls in assessment year 1972-73.

On the same provision

Other instruments in this library that name the same provision of the 1961 Act. They are not necessarily still operative, and a later one may have replaced an earlier one without saying so.

← Circular No. 155  ·  Circular No. 153 →

A circular binds the department, not you and not a court. The Board issues a circular to its own officers. An assessee may hold the department to a circular that helps him; the department cannot hold an assessee to one that hurts him, and the Tribunal and the courts decide the law for themselves.

Source: the Income Tax Department’s own published text — its page for this instrument.