9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Allowability of Licence Fees as a Deduction 2. Nature of Payment to DOT 3. Revenue Sharing Arrangement 4. Capital vs. Revenue Expenditure 5. Statutory Nature of Licence Fee 6. Estoppel and Revised Returns Summary: 1. Allowability of Licence Fees as a Deduction The assessee, a government-owned company, claimed a deduction of Rs. 282.60 crores as licence fees paid to the Department of Telecommunications (DOT) for the assessment year 1995-96. The Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed the claim, treating the licence fee as a replacement for the previously disallowed DOT levy, which was considered a revenue-sharing arrangement and not an allowable deduction. 2. Nature of Payment to DOT The AO observed that the licence fee was introduced as a replacement for the DOT levy, which was 40% of the assessee's earnings. The AO concluded that the licence fee was essentially a substitute for the DOT levy and therefore not an allowable expenditure. The CIT(A) upheld this view, noting that the taxes paid by the assessee on the disallowed DOT levy were reimbursed by DOT, indicating a special relationship between DOT and the assessee. 3. Revenue Sharing Arrangement The Tribunal examined the provisions of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, and the nature of the payments made by the assessee to DOT. It was found that the payment, whether termed as DOT levy or licence fee, was for the use of the telecom network owned by DOT. The Tribunal noted that the payment was closely linked to the business carried on by the assessee and should be allowed as a deduction u/s 37(1) of the IT Act. 4. Capital vs. Revenue Expenditure The Tribunal rejected the Department's contention that the licence fee conferred an enduring advantage to the assessee and should be treated as capital expenditure. It was held that the payment was directly related to the actual utilisation of the telecom network and was an integral part of the profit-earning process. The Tribunal emphasized that the licence fee was not for acquiring an asset or a right of a permanent character but was necessary for the conduct of the business. 5. Statutory Nature of Licence Fee The Tribunal dismissed the argument that the licence fee was not a statutory payment. It was noted that the licence fee was paid under the provisions of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, and derived its authority from the statute. The Tribunal referred to various Supreme Court judgments to support the view that such payments are a normal incident of a trading or business transaction and should be allowed as business expenditure. 6. Estoppel and Revised Returns The Tribunal addressed the issue of revised returns filed by the assessee for the assessment years 1992-93 and 1993-94, where the DOT levy was disallowed. It was held that the filing of revised returns did not constitute estoppel, and the assessee was entitled to claim the deduction for the licence fee in the current assessment year based on the true position in law. Conclusion: The Tribunal allowed the appeal, holding that the amount of Rs. 282.60 crores paid by the assessee to DOT as licence fees is an allowable expenditure u/s 37(1) of the IT Act in computing the profits of the assessee's business.
|
