2003 (4) TMI 51 - HC - Income Tax

Interest Tax Act, 1974 - section 5 - chargeable interest - Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that (i) interest paid by the assessee to the participating financial institutions on loan, and (ii) discount on promissory notes/ bills of the RBI, IDBI and other financial institutions are allowable as a deduction in arriving at the chargeable interest under the Interest-tax Act, 1974 ? - we answer the question referred to us in the affirmative i.e., in favour of the assessee-bank and against the Department

Summary

Issues:
1. Whether interest and discount paid by the assessee to participating financial institutions are allowable as a deduction in arriving at the chargeable interest under the Interest-tax Act, 1974?

Detailed Analysis:
The judgment delivered by the High Court of Bombay pertained to an assessment involving a banking company for the years 1983-84 to 1986-87 under the Interest-tax Act, 1974. The assessee, a nationalized bank, filed its return claiming deduction for rediscounting charges paid to institutions like IDBI and RBI under a rediscounting/refinancing scheme. The Income-tax Officer disallowed this deduction, asserting that such charges constituted interest and, therefore, were not eligible for deduction. The matter proceeded to the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and subsequently to the Tribunal, which directed the deduction to be allowed. The Department then brought the issue to the High Court for opinion under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act.

The primary question before the court was whether interest and discount paid by the assessee to participating financial institutions could be considered as a deduction in calculating the chargeable interest under the Interest-tax Act, 1974. The Department argued that such payments formed part of the gross receipt of interest and, therefore, were not eligible for deduction. Reference was made to section 5 of the Interest-tax Act to support this contention. However, the court disagreed with the Department's argument and found in favor of the assessee.

The court observed that the funds disbursed by participating financial institutions to nationalized banks at lower interest rates for approved projects constituted a valid scheme. The court noted that when the bank received interest from borrowers, it paid rediscounting charges to the participating financial institutions. The court held that the title to these charges vested in the participating financial institutions and not in the assessee-bank. Therefore, the court concluded that these rediscounting charges could not be taxed as interest accruing to the assessee-bank under section 5 of the Interest-tax Act.

In reaching its decision, the court relied on a similar judgment by the Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT v. Canara Bank [1989] 175 ITR 601. The court ultimately answered the question in the affirmative, favoring the assessee-bank and ruling against the Department. The reference was disposed of with no order as to costs.