2015 (1) TMI 1242 - HC - Income Tax

Entitlement to deduction under Section 80IC - ITAT allowed the claim treating the transport and interest subsidy as part of the business profit - Held that - The point raised before the learned Tribunal is really covered by the judgment of the Guwahati High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Versus-Meghalaya Steels Ltd (2013 (7) TMI 175 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT ) wherein it was held that where there was a direct nexus between the subsidies on the one hand and the profits and gains derived by or derived from the industrial undertakings concerned the assessee was entitled to claim deduction either under Section 80-IB or under Section 80-IC on the transport subsidy interest subsidy power subsidy and insurance subsidy. We are in full agreement with the views expressed by the Guwahati High Court and of the opinion that the judgment of the learned Tribunal is unexceptionable.

Summary

Issues:
- Entitlement to deduction under Section 80IC for transport and interest subsidy as part of business profit.
- Applicability of judgments in CIT Vs. Andaman Timber Industries Ltd. and Liberty India V. Commissioner of Income Tax.
- Differentiation between operational subsidy and capital subsidy.
- Direct nexus between subsidies and profits derived from industrial undertakings for claiming deductions under Section 80-IB or Section 80-IC.

Entitlement to Deduction under Section 80IC:
The appeal in this case contested the entitlement to deduction under Section 80IC for transport and interest subsidy as part of the business profit. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal had allowed the deduction based on its earlier judgment in a similar case. However, the Revenue challenged this decision, arguing that the subsidies did not constitute profit derived from the industrial undertaking. The appellant relied on the judgment in CIT Vs. Andaman Timber Industries Ltd. to support this contention.

Applicability of Previous Judgments:
The appellant also cited the judgment in Liberty India V. Commissioner of Income Tax, which held that certain subsidies could not be treated as profit derived from industrial undertakings. However, the High Court distinguished this case by highlighting that the subsidies in question directly reduced the cost of production, unlike those in the Liberty India case. The Court emphasized the importance of the subsidies' direct nexus with the manufacturing activity in determining their treatment as profit derived from the industrial undertaking.

Differentiation between Subsidy Types:
The Court further discussed the distinction between operational subsidy and capital subsidy, as established in the Sahney Steel And Press Works Ltd. case. It clarified that subsidies aimed at reducing the cost of production were operational in nature and could be considered for deductions under Section 80-IB or Section 80-IC. The judgment in CIT Vs. Andaman Timber Industries Ltd. was critiqued for not considering this crucial differentiation.

Direct Nexus for Claiming Deductions:
Ultimately, the Court agreed with the Guwahati High Court's decision in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Meghalaya Steels Ltd., which emphasized the necessity of a direct nexus between subsidies and the profits derived from industrial undertakings to claim deductions under Section 80-IB or Section 80-IC. The Court found the Tribunal's judgment in line with this principle and upheld the entitlement to deductions for transport and interest subsidies. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, affirming the Tribunal's decision.