2014 (12) TMI 1272 - AT - Income Tax

Disallowance of employee cost, office and administrative expenses and selling and administrative expenses - method of accounting followed - Held that - The percentage completion method of accounting has been regularly followed by the assessee. In the succeeding assessment year 2010-11, the AO has accepted the deductibility of the identical nature of expenses in the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) of the I.T. Act. We agree with contention of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that the employee cost refers to salary paid to the employees who are looking after the administration of office and not directly related to construction of the project but is part of the administrative expenses. Similarly, the office and administrative expenses and selling and marketing expenses are to be charged to the profit & loss account in the very same year in which they are incurred and have to be excluded from the cost of inventories for working out closing WIP as per the guidelines issued by the ICAI, Accounting Standard AS-2 and AS-7. The assessee has regularly and consistently been following the said method of accounting as per the provisions of section 145A of the I.T. Act. The AO has not assigned any cogent reason as to why the method, which has been consistently followed by assessee and accepted by the department in past as well in succeeding assessment years and which is in accordance with the recognized principles of accounting by ICAI, is being rejected. In our view, the action of the Revenue Authorities in rejecting the assessee s accounting method, without assigning any reason is not justified. The accounting method followed by the assessee and thereby excluding the indirect expenses such as office employees salary, administrative expenses and marketing & selling expenses is as per the recognized principles of accountings and as such the claim of the assessee deserves to be allowed. We hold accordingly. The additions made by the lower authorities on this issue are hereby ordered to be deleted. - Decided in favour of assessee

Summary

Issues:
1. Disallowance of indirect expenses for calculating closing work-in-progress.
2. Disallowance of specific expenses to be added to work in progress.
3. Failure to adjudicate on set off of brought forward losses.

Issue 1 - Disallowance of Indirect Expenses:
The assessee, a partnership firm in the construction business, appealed against the disallowance of employee cost, administrative expenses, and selling expenses for calculating closing work-in-progress. The Assessing Officer (AO) contended that all expenses should be capitalized to work-in-progress, but the assessee argued that these expenses were not directly related to the project under construction. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (CIT(A)) allowed these expenses as revenue expenditure in proportion to completion. The Tribunal agreed, citing accounting standards and guidelines that exclude certain expenses from inventory cost. The Tribunal upheld the assessee's method of accounting, which was consistent with recognized principles, and ordered the disallowance to be deleted.

Issue 2 - Disallowance of Specific Expenses:
The assessee contested the addition of specific expenses to work in progress. The AO recomputed the closing work-in-progress, but the CIT(A) adjusted the amount to be carried forward based on the percentage of completion. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, considering the expenses as revenue expenditure in proportion to the completion of the project. The assessee's accounting method was found to be in line with accounting standards, and the disallowance was overturned.

Issue 3 - Failure to Adjudicate on Set Off:
The CIT(A) did not adjudicate on the set off of brought forward losses. As both parties requested a proper opportunity to present their case on this issue, the Tribunal restored it to the CIT(A) for adjudication. Ultimately, the appeal of the assessee was allowed, and the order was pronounced in favor of the assessee on 10.12.2014.