2012 (7) TMI 311 - AT - Income Tax

Disallowance u/s 14A - expenditure incurred to earn exempt dividend income by applying the provision of Rule 8D - Held that - Assessee submitted before the AO that all the investments made by it were through internal funds and it did not incur any expenditure having direct or indirect nexus with dividend income. Apparently, the assessee did not furnish any such details of incurring expenditure while making huge investments - for the pre-Rule 8D period, whenever the issue of section 14A arises AO has, first of all, to ascertain the correctness of the claim of the assessee in respect of the expenditure incurred in relation to income which does not form part of the total income - it is nothing in the assessment order or impugned order as to whether the assessee expressed his willingness to furnish the details desired by the AO nor the AO or the CIT(A) seems to have undertook any exercise to ascertain the details of expenditure objectively in managing and supervising the aforesaid huge investments in shares and securities - set aside the order of the CIT(A) and restore the matter to his file for deciding the issue afresh. Disallowance of donation - Held that - Though the assessee claimed that donation was deductible u/s 37(1), but not an evidence was placed before the lower authorities as how the expenditure is related to the business of the assessee nor the activities of the SREI Foundation were narrated. Since the assessee failed to establish the nexus of the aforesaid amount with the business of the assessee, apparently the claim is not admissible Denial of the claim of allowability of leave encashment - Held that - Disallowance of an amount n terms of directions dated 8th May, 2009 of the Supreme Court in the case of Exide Industries Ltd. 2007 (6) TMI 175 (HC) with a rider that the assessee is free to move a rectification petition on the final out come in the case of Exide Industries Ltd., we do not find any infirmity in the approach of the ld. CIT(A) Dis allowing TDS credit - Held that - there is no recourse available to the deductee to get credit regarding TDS for any mismatch in the departmental computer system. As per section 199(2) of the I.T. Act credit for tax deducted is automatic and there is no provision in the Income Tax Act for appeal before the CIT (A) against the non-granting of TDS credit u/s 199(2). The appellate authorities are not provided with any access to the departmental computer system to verify any of the details regarding TDS credit. Therefore, the recourse available to the appellant is to approach the concerned administrative authorities with grievance petition - against assessee.

Issues Involved:
1. Disallowance under Section 14A for expenses incurred to earn exempt dividend income.
2. Disallowance of donation for business purposes.
3. Denial of leave encashment claim on a provision basis.
4. Non-allowance of TDS credit.
5. Material adjustments in computing total income and tax.
6. Additional grounds for appeal.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Disallowance under Section 14A:
The assessee argued against the disallowance of Rs. 58,34,750/- under Section 14A, contending that no expenditure was incurred to earn exempt dividend income. The Assessing Officer (AO) applied Rule 8D, disallowing 0.5% of the average investment. The CIT(A) upheld this, referencing the Bombay High Court's decision in Godrej Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd., which mandates disallowance of expenses related to exempt income. The Tribunal noted that the assessee did not provide details of expenses incurred for managing investments. The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order, directing a fresh examination in light of relevant judicial pronouncements, emphasizing the need for a speaking order and verification of expenditure details.

2. Disallowance of Donation:
The AO disallowed Rs. 4,30,000/- claimed as a donation, as the assessee failed to prove its nexus with business purposes. The CIT(A) upheld this, stating the assessee did not demonstrate how the donation was wholly and exclusively for business. The Tribunal agreed, noting the lack of evidence linking the donation to business activities, and dismissed the ground.

3. Denial of Leave Encashment Claim:
The AO disallowed Rs. 16,09,215/- for leave encashment provision based on the Supreme Court's stay in Exide Industries Ltd. The CIT(A) upheld this, referencing the Supreme Court's directive to pay tax as if Section 43B(f) is valid. The Tribunal found no infirmity in the CIT(A)'s approach, noting the assessee's right to seek rectification based on the final Supreme Court decision, and dismissed the ground.

4. Non-allowance of TDS Credit:
The AO did not discuss TDS credit of Rs. 1,35,31,105/-. The CIT(A) directed the assessee to approach administrative authorities, as the appellate authorities lack access to verify TDS details. The Tribunal upheld this, directing the AO to expedite steps to allow TDS credit per Section 199, subject to the assessee providing relevant material.

5. Material Adjustments in Computing Total Income and Tax:
The Tribunal did not separately adjudicate this ground as it was general in nature and no specific submissions were made.

6. Additional Grounds for Appeal:
No additional grounds were raised, and the Tribunal dismissed this ground.

Conclusion:
The appeal was partly allowed for statistical purposes, with directions for fresh examination on the disallowance under Section 14A and instructions for the AO to expedite TDS credit processing. The Tribunal upheld the disallowance of donation and leave encashment provision claims.

← Previous Next →