2012 (4) TMI 602 - AT - Income Tax

Foreign exchange fluctuation - Held that - Loss suffered by an assessee on account of fluctuation in the rate of foreign exchange as on the date of balance sheet is an item of expenditure under section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 Disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) - Held that - It is not in dispute that tax has been deducted at the applicable rates and the same has been remitted before due date of filing of the return. Sufficient compliance has been made after tax is remitted before the due date of filing of return. Disallowance made under section 14A read with Rule 8D to 5% of dividend income earned - Held that - CIT(A) after examining the facts of the case and submissions of the parties has rightly held that 5% of the dividend income would be reasonable expenditure to earn the dividend income of 2,13,19,656/- thereby restricting disallowance to ₹ 10,65,980/-. In view of our above findings, we uphold the order of the CIT(A) and dismiss this ground of appeal as well.

Summary

Issues:
- Disallowance of foreign exchange fluctuation
- Disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) for late TDS remittance
- Disallowance of consultancy charges
- Disallowance of software expenses
- Disallowance under section 2(24)(x)
- Disallowance under section 14A
- Disallowance under section 94(7)

Analysis:

1. Foreign Exchange Fluctuation Disallowance:
The Assessing Officer disallowed a claimed loss of `44,76,485/- due to foreign exchange rate fluctuation, considering it as a notional loss. However, the Tribunal disagreed, citing the Hon'ble Supreme Court's decision in CIT Vs. Woodward Governor India Ltd. The Tribunal held that the loss on account of fluctuation in the rate of foreign exchange is an expenditure under section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, as it affects the valuation of receivables, which is a current asset.

2. Disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) - Late TDS Remittance:
The Assessing Officer disallowed a commission and brokerage amount under section 40(a)(ia) due to TDS remittance after the year-end. The CIT(A) reversed this decision, citing precedents from the Tribunal. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, emphasizing that as long as TDS is deducted at applicable rates and remitted before the due date of filing the return, the disallowance is not warranted.

3. Disallowance under Section 14A - Dividend Income:
The Assessing Officer disallowed an amount under Rule 8D, which was applicable from the assessment year 2008-09, for the assessment year 2006-07. The Tribunal referred to the Bombay High Court's decision in Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd. case, stating that Rule 8D is not applicable for the relevant year. The CIT(A) restricted the disallowance to 5% of the dividend income earned, which the Tribunal upheld as reasonable, dismissing the Revenue's appeal.

In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed both appeals by the Revenue, upholding the CIT(A)'s decisions on the issues of foreign exchange fluctuation disallowance, late TDS remittance disallowance, and restricting the disallowance under section 14A to 5% of dividend income earned. The judgments were based on legal precedents and interpretations of relevant tax laws and regulations.