2011 (12) TMI 330 - HC - Income Tax

Contingent Liability - provision for post-sale customer service Whether it should be allowed as an expenditure despite the same have not been incurred by the assessee during the current assessment year - Held that - Order was passed by the Tribunal on September 9 2005. Therefore the benefit of the decision of the hon ble Supreme Court in Rotork Controls India P. Ltd. s case 2009 (5) TMI 16 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA was not available to the Tribunal - In the said decision the hon ble Supreme Court has laid down the conditions which are required to be satisfied for making claim in respect of post-sale customer service and has laid down the principles pertaining to the same - SC has stated that in each case all the conditions to be satisfied are to be considered - Appeal disposed of accordingly in the light of the principles laid down in Rotork Controls India P. Ltd. s case and the matter is remanded to the Tribunal to pass fresh orders in accordance with law on the said question.

Summary

Issues:
1. Whether the payment made to club subscription for obtaining corporate membership is a revenue expenditure?
2. Whether provision for post-sale customer service, a contingent liability, should be allowed as an expenditure despite not being incurred during the current assessment year?
3. Whether exchange rate variation gains should be excluded from total turnover and export turnover for deduction under Sec.80HHE of the Act?

Analysis:

Issue 1:
The appellant challenged the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal regarding the nature of the payment made for club subscription for corporate membership. The Assessing Officer considered it as capital expenditure, but the Tribunal reversed this decision, deeming it as revenue expenditure. The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, stating that the expenditure was revenue in nature.

Issue 2:
Regarding the provision for post-sale customer service, the Assessing Officer disallowed the claim, stating that the expenses were not actually incurred during the assessment year. However, the appellate authority allowed the claim based on past expenditure and scientifically maintained accounts by the assessee. The High Court emphasized the need to consider the conditions laid down by the Supreme Court in a specific case and remanded the matter to the Tribunal for reevaluation.

Issue 3:
The dispute over whether exchange rate variation gains should be excluded from turnover for deduction under Sec.80HHE of the Act was also addressed. The Assessing Officer's decision to exclude these gains was set aside by the appellate authority, and the Tribunal upheld this decision. The High Court referred to a relevant Supreme Court decision and remanded the matter to the Tribunal for fresh consideration in accordance with the principles outlined in the Supreme Court case.

In conclusion, the High Court analyzed each substantial question of law raised in the appeal comprehensively, referring to past decisions and legal principles. The judgment highlighted the importance of adhering to specific conditions and principles laid down by higher courts in determining the allowability of certain expenditures and deductions under the Income Tax Act. The matter was remanded to the Tribunal for further evaluation in light of the applicable legal standards.