2008 (2) TMI 891 - AT - Income Tax

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Addition to sales shown in audited accounts.
2. Disallowance of expenditure on artwork, proofing, and design charges.
3. Disallowance of write-off of inventory.
4. Consequential benefit u/s 80HHC.
5. Levy of interest u/s 234B, 234C, and 234D and withdrawal of interest u/s 244A.

Summary:

Assessment Year: 2000-2001

1. Addition to Sales:
Ground No. 1.1 to 1.6 pertained to the addition of Rs. 2,74,38,300/- to the sales shown in the audited accounts. The Tribunal noted that the facts were identical to those in the assessment year 1998-99, where the addition was deleted. The Tribunal found that the basis for taxation under the Central Excise Act and the Income-tax Act is different, and the transactions between the assessee and Oriflame were on a principal-to-principal basis, not related concerns. There was no material to show that a colourable device was used to defraud the revenue. The Tribunal deleted the addition following its earlier order.

2. Disallowance of Expenditure:
The second ground was against the disallowance of Rs. 2,44,702/- on artwork, proofing, and design charges for packing, treated as capital expenditure. The Tribunal disagreed with the income-tax authorities, stating that the expenditure was incurred to improve the profitability of the business and did not confer an enduring benefit. The disallowance was deleted, and the expenditure was allowed as revenue expenditure.

3. Disallowance of Write-off of Inventory:
Ground No. 3 addressed the disallowance of Rs. 30,05,581/- for the write-off of obsolete raw material. The Tribunal found that the assessee had consistently followed a practice of creating a provision for obsolete raw material, which was accepted by the income-tax authorities in the past. The Tribunal upheld the assessee's claim and deleted the disallowance.

Assessment Year: 2001-2002

4. Addition on Account of Suppression of Sales:
Ground No. 2 related to the addition of Rs. 2,62,09,137/- for suppression of sales, identical to the issue in the previous year. The Tribunal deleted the addition in line with its decision for the assessment year 2000-2001.

5. Disallowance of Provision for Write-off of Inventory:
Ground No. 3 involved the disallowance of Rs. 44,63,696/- for the provision made for the write-off of inventory. The Tribunal deleted the disallowance, consistent with its decision for the previous year.

6. Consequential Benefit u/s 80HHC:
Ground No. 4 was about the non-allowance of consequential benefit u/s 80HHC when the returned loss was converted into positive income due to additions. This ground was consequential to the Tribunal's decisions on the other grounds.

7. Levy of Interest:
Ground Nos. 5 and 6 concerned the levy of interest u/s 234B, 234C, and 234D and the withdrawal of interest u/s 244A. These grounds were stated to be consequential, and the assessee would get relief accordingly.

Conclusion:
The appeal for the assessment year 2000-2001 was allowed, and the appeal for the assessment year 2001-2002 was partly allowed. No costs were awarded.