2010 (10) TMI 691 - AT - Income Tax

Claim of expenditure on account of Rebate of allotment of houses - the assessee had incurred the expenditure of allowing rebate to the Government institutions, who in turn had invested in various properties of the assessee Board, the said expenditure is allowable in the hands of the assessee. The rebate was allowed as one time settlement during the year under consideration pursuant to the meeting of the Board of Directors of the assessee on 18-4-2002 in which it was decided to allow the said rebate - The rebate was allowed as one time settlement and not because of any waiver of interest. The decision to allow rebate by the Board of Directors of the assessee was a commercial decision taken in the circumstances of the case, where rebate was allowed to certain institutional bodies i.e., Insurance Companies, HSIDC, HFC, etc. against advances received during the years 1991 to 2002, wherein increase in the cost, due to delay in construction of houses, was charged to them - appeal of the revenue is dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (A) regarding assessment year 2003-04 under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act.

Analysis:
1. The Tribunal set aside the issue of rebate of allotment of houses back to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication due to lack of clarity on details furnished by the assessee. The Tribunal directed the assessee to provide necessary information for the Assessing Officer to decide the issue afresh in accordance with the law after giving a reasonable opportunity to be heard.

2. The Assessing Officer observed that the expenditure debited was not related to the financial year under consideration and requested the assessee to submit year-wise details of such interest. The Assessing Officer disallowed the expenditure on rebate of houses as the assessee failed to provide the necessary details during initial assessment proceedings.

3. The Commissioner of Income-tax (A) considered the arguments presented by the assessee, emphasizing that the rebate was a genuine business expenditure allowed by the Board of Directors to compensate institutions for advances given since 1991. The Commissioner held that the rebate was a legitimate business expense, relatable to the assessment year under consideration, and was one-time settlement compensation without interest.

4. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's decision, stating that the expenditure incurred by the assessee in allowing rebates to Government institutions was allowable. The rebate was granted as a commercial decision by the Board of Directors during the financial year itself, making it a genuine business expense related to the business activities of the assessee. The Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal, confirming the allowance of the rebate expenditure as a legitimate business expense.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the issues involved, the arguments presented by the parties, and the decisions made by the Tribunal and the Commissioner of Income-tax (A) regarding the allowance of the rebate expenditure as a legitimate business expense for the assessment year 2003-04 under the Income-tax Act.