2009 (11) TMI 958 - AT - Income Tax

Issues Involved:

1. Disallowance of 100% depreciation claim on pollution control equipment.
2. Inclusion of sales-tax and excise duty in total turnover for Section 80HHC.
3. Deduction under Section 80HHC for delayed realization of export proceeds.
4. Disallowance of interest claimed on borrowings for payment of advance tax.
5. Disallowance of expenditure on replacement of crates and steam ejector system.
6. Disallowance of credit balances written off.
7. Eligibility of "other income" for deduction under Section 80IA.
8. Inclusion of excise duty in closing stock valuation.
9. Disallowance of foreign travel expenses.
10. Deduction under Section 80HHC and miscellaneous income.
11. Deduction under Section 80IA and proportionate reduction for Section 80HHC.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Disallowance of 100% Depreciation Claim on Pollution Control Equipment:
The assessee claimed 100% depreciation on pollution control equipment (scrubber) under the head "machinery and plant" item-(2)(iv)(d). The AO allowed only 25% depreciation under item-(1). The Tribunal upheld the AO's decision, dismissing the assessee's ground.

2. Inclusion of Sales-Tax and Excise Duty in Total Turnover for Section 80HHC:
The assessee contested the inclusion of sales-tax and excise duty in the total turnover. The Tribunal directed the AO to exclude these amounts from the total turnover, following the Supreme Court's judgment in CIT Vs. Lakshmi Machine Works.

3. Deduction Under Section 80HHC for Delayed Realization of Export Proceeds:
The assessee raised a bill for Rs. 88,13,339/- with proceeds realized one day late. The RBI granted post-facto approval for the delay. The Tribunal directed the AO to include the amount as part of the export turnover, allowing the assessee's ground.

4. Disallowance of Interest Claimed on Borrowings for Payment of Advance Tax:
The AO disallowed interest of Rs. 2,87,204/- on borrowings used for advance tax payment. The Tribunal, relying on the Calcutta High Court's judgment in Woolcombers of India Ltd. Vs. CIT, held that the advance tax was presumed paid out of business profits, not borrowings. The disallowance was deleted.

5. Disallowance of Expenditure on Replacement of Crates and Steam Ejector System:
The Tribunal directed the AO to allow the expenditure on the steam ejector system as a deduction, following its earlier orders. For crates, the Tribunal directed the AO to verify the cost and allow the deduction if it met the criteria under Section 32.

6. Disallowance of Credit Balances Written Off:
The Tribunal deleted the disallowance of Rs. 51,175/- and Rs. 32,878/- written off by the assessee, holding that the corrections were justified and necessary to avoid double taxation.

7. Eligibility of "Other Income" for Deduction Under Section 80IA:
The Tribunal examined various components of "other income" and held that certain items like dividend, penalty, and miscellaneous income were not eligible for deduction. The Tribunal directed the AO to examine the nature of the insurance claim and allow net interest after adjusting interest paid by the assessee.

8. Inclusion of Excise Duty in Closing Stock Valuation:
The Tribunal deleted the addition of Rs. 46,28,894/- for excise duty in closing stock valuation, following its earlier orders and the judgment of the Madras High Court in English Electric Company.

9. Disallowance of Foreign Travel Expenses:
The Tribunal allowed the foreign travel expenses of Rs. 92,250/- incurred for the sales agent, holding that the expenditure was justified under business exigencies.

10. Deduction Under Section 80HHC and Miscellaneous Income:
The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision not to exclude 90% of the miscellaneous income while calculating the deduction under Section 80HHC, as the receipts did not fall under the specified categories in Explanation (baa).

11. Deduction Under Section 80IA and Proportionate Reduction for Section 80HHC:
The Tribunal reversed the CIT(A)'s decision and upheld the AO's method of reducing the profits of units by the proportionate deduction under Section 80HHC before allowing deduction under Section 80IA, following the Special Bench decision in ACIT Vs. Hindustan Mint and Agro Products (P) Ltd.

Conclusion:
Both the assessee's and revenue's appeals were partly allowed, with specific directions provided for each issue.

← Previous Next →