2017 (4) TMI 1239 - HC - Income Tax

Disallowance of interest - Held that - It is stated that if assessee has utilized its non-interest bearing funds for giving non- interest bearing advances then no disallowance is called for. The AO has merely gone by the fact that assessee had given interest free advances to different concerns of assessee s group. He has not commented upon the actual sources from where these advances were given. In the block assessment for the period ending on 2.7.1999, it has been clearly observed as noted above that assessee was having sufficient own funds to finance the interest free advances. These facts being not controverted no disallowance is called for. We, accordingly, confirm, the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue. Accrual pf income - Foreign currency translation difference as income as per accounting principle and only on notional basis - Held that - AO in assessment year 1993-94, had observed that this difference arose as it was in different accounts appearing in the books at the exchange rate prevailing on the first day of the accounting year were translated in Indian Rupees at the closing date. The difference was adjusted in the accounts of foreign currency translation difference. The amount of this difference was notional debit/credit and did not represent any loss or income for the purpose of computing the taxable income under the Income-Tax Act. The entries on this account were made only for balancing the books. Therefore, this exercise was merely done on account of incorporating the trial balance appearing in the Iraqi branch in the Head Officer books in Indian currency. Since no actual gain accrued to the assessee, there was no question of taxing this amount. We, accordingly, confirm the order of the ld. CIT(A) following the precedent and in view of aforementioned discussion

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Depreciation on Iraqi assets.
2. Depreciation on temporary erections.
3. Disallowance of interest on borrowings.
4. Addition on account of retention money.
5. Disallowance of manufacturing and miscellaneous expenses.
6. Disallowance of deduction under Section 80IA.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Depreciation on Iraqi Assets:
The Tribunal dismissed the departmental appeal regarding the addition of ?1,56,786/- made on account of depreciation on Iraqi assets. The Tribunal found that the Assessing Officer (AO) computed the foreign currency translation difference as income on a notional basis, which did not represent any actual gain or loss for computing taxable income. The Tribunal confirmed that no actual gain accrued to the assessee, thus no question of taxing this amount arose.

2. Depreciation on Temporary Erections:
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal concerning the addition of ?6,52,16,092/- for depreciation on temporary erections. The Tribunal held that durable structures made of cement, bricks, and steel, designed to last 10 to 15 years, qualified as purely temporary structures eligible for 100% depreciation under the Income Tax Rules, 1962. This decision was based on the factual appreciation that these structures were temporary in nature and thus eligible for full depreciation.

3. Disallowance of Interest on Borrowings:
The Tribunal dismissed the departmental appeal regarding the disallowance of ?2,46,000/- on account of interest on borrowings. The AO had disallowed interest because the assessee had given interest-free advances to sister concerns and others for non-business purposes. However, the Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had correctly deleted the disallowance, noting that the assessee had substantial non-interest-bearing funds of its own and that no interest-bearing funds were diverted for non-business purposes. This decision was consistent with previous assessments where similar disallowances were deleted.

4. Addition on Account of Retention Money:
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal concerning the addition of ?45,10,040/- made on account of retention money. The Tribunal found that the AO's addition was not justified as it did not appreciate the facts of the case and the material brought on record. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s view that the retention money was not taxable as it did not represent actual income during the assessment year.

5. Disallowance of Manufacturing and Miscellaneous Expenses:
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal regarding the disallowance of ?52,01,960/- and ?51,29,658/- on account of manufacturing and miscellaneous expenses respectively. The Tribunal found that the AO had not appreciated the facts of the case and the material brought on record. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision that these expenses were legitimate and should not be disallowed.

6. Disallowance of Deduction under Section 80IA:
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal concerning the disallowance of ?1,12,05,26,953/- on account of deduction under Section 80IA. The Tribunal found that the AO's disallowance was not justified as it did not appreciate the facts of the case and the material brought on record. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision that the assessee was entitled to the deduction under Section 80IA.

Additional Judgments:
The Tribunal's decisions were consistent with previous judgments in similar cases, such as Income Tax Appeal No. 87 of 2008 and Income Tax Appeal No. 111 of 2008, where similar questions of law were answered against the Revenue and in favor of the assessee. The Tribunal found no substantial questions of law arising from the facts of the case, and the appeals were dismissed accordingly.