2012 (10) TMI 1026 - AT - Income Tax

Deduction u/s. 80IA - Formation of a new plant by splitting up of the existing business - whether the new undertaking is identifiable undertaking separate and distinct from the existing business - Held that - generation of power unit is separate and distinct undertaking for which separate approval was obtained and recognised by the IREDA and it cannot be said that splitting of existing business structure. - Deduction u/s 80IA allowed by following earlier decision in assessee s own case 2012 (2) TMI 483 - ITAT HYDERABAD - Decided in favor of assessee Deduction of cost of steam - whether value can be attributed to steam - Tax evasion by inter-unit transaction of sale of steam at inflated rate - Held that - steam produced by the assessee is eligible unit is a by-product and income from sale of steam is the income derived from industrial undertaking - deduction u/s 80-IA is allowable - Assessee to furnish necessary records for the purpose of determining the value of the steam produced and transferred to sugar unit - Decided partly in favor of assessee Interim order of the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity - Held that - Assessee is not the party to the proceedings - Electricity fixed rate ₹ 3.25 p.u in place of which ₹ 3.48 p.u is adopted by the assessee - AO to disallow ₹ 0.23 and calculate the disallowance based on the units supplied by the assessee to Sugar and Cement units - Decided in favor of revenue

Summary

Issues:
1. Deduction under section 80IA for power generation plant.
2. Allowance of cost of steam as expenditure in sugar unit.
3. Inter-unit transaction of sale of steam.
4. Application of Interim Relief order by Appellate Tribunal for Electricity.

Issue 1: Deduction under section 80IA for power generation plant:
The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A) order directing the Assessing Officer to allow deduction under section 80IA for a power generation plant. The Tribunal, referring to a previous case, emphasized that the power plant was a distinct unit from the existing business, supported by separate technology and licensing. The Tribunal concluded that the new undertaking for power generation was separate and distinct, not formed by splitting the existing business. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A) order, dismissing the Revenue's ground.

Issue 2: Allowance of cost of steam as expenditure in sugar unit:
The Revenue contested the allowance of the cost of steam as expenditure in the sugar unit. The Tribunal noted that the profit credited for steam was minimal and directed that only the specific amount be treated as ineligible profits for deduction under section 80IA. Citing a precedent, the Tribunal allowed the deduction for the sale of steam to the sugar division, emphasizing the eligibility of steam as a by-product. The Tribunal remitted the issue back to the Assessing Officer for determining the value of steam produced by the power plant.

Issue 3: Inter-unit transaction of sale of steam:
The Revenue raised concerns about a tax-evading scheme involving the sale of steam between units. The Tribunal clarified the treatment of steam profits and directed a specific amount as ineligible for deduction under section 80IA. The Tribunal upheld the eligibility of the sale of steam for deduction, referencing a relevant case law. The issue was remitted back to the Assessing Officer for further quantification based on production records.

Issue 4: Application of Interim Relief order by Appellate Tribunal for Electricity:
The Revenue challenged the direction to apply an Interim Relief order by the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity regarding electricity tariff. The Tribunal noted that the assessee was not a party to the decision, thus reversing the CIT(A)'s findings and restoring the Assessing Officer's order. The appeal of the Revenue was partly allowed in this regard.

In conclusion, the Tribunal addressed multiple issues regarding the deduction under section 80IA, treatment of steam costs, inter-unit transactions of steam, and the application of an Interim Relief order. Each issue was analyzed in detail, referencing precedents and directing further actions where necessary. The Tribunal provided comprehensive reasoning for each decision, ensuring clarity and adherence to legal principles.