2012 (8) TMI 430 - HC - Income Tax

Business discount claimed at 2.81% of the total sales - partial dis-allowance - revenue contended that following the past history the discount @ 2% of the sale was made admissible for deductions - Tribunal deleted the dis-allowance - Held that - In order to claim discounts, which had increased for AY in question from 2% to 2.8% and which turned down to Rs 63,59,106/-, the insistence of the AO to verify such discounts by making an independent enquiry was justified. The discounts are offered after the scheme is prepared in accordance with the policy of the company, which may vary from year-to-year and may also depend upon the business strategy adopted to meet the market conditions. The companies do not offer discounts on adhoc basis. The amount was substantial and could not be given on adhoc treatment at the time of assessment. Matter restored to the file of AO to conduct enquiry - Decided in favour of Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Disallowance under Section 40A (2) (b) of IT Act
2. Addition of rent paid for hiring premises
3. Claim of lease rentals/charges
4. Disallowance on account of claim for discount
5. Deduction under Section 80HH

Issue 1: Disallowance under Section 40A (2) (b) of IT Act
The appeal concerned the disallowance under Section 40A (2) (b) of the IT Act amounting to Rs. 25,00,000 paid to M/s Modi Rubber Ltd. The assessee failed to prove that the expenditure was for business purposes. The Court found that this issue was covered by a previous decision between the same parties, and it was decided in favor of the revenue.

Issue 2: Addition of rent paid for hiring premises
The question of whether the addition of Rs. 12,00,000 paid as rent to M/s Silver Tone India Ltd. for hiring premises, which were being used as a guest house, was legally justified was raised. The Court noted that this issue was also covered by the previous decision and decided in favor of the revenue.

Issue 3: Claim of lease rentals/charges
The appeal also raised the question of whether the claim of lease rentals/charges of Rs. 3,30,68,110 was justified, even though the zerox machine and equipment had not passed on to the lessors directly connected with the user of the goods. The Court found that this issue was covered by the previous decision and decided in favor of the revenue.

Issue 4: Disallowance on account of claim for discount
The disallowance on account of a claim for discount amounting to Rs. 63,59,106 was challenged. The Court observed that the Tribunal had erred in interfering with the remand order for verification of facts and examining the discount claim on an actual basis. It was found that the Tribunal did not properly consider the findings of the AO/CIT (A) regarding the discount claim and the lack of customer addresses for verification.

Issue 5: Deduction under Section 80HH
The question of whether the claim of deduction under Section 80HH was allowable only for two profit-making industrial units and whether the loss of the third unit should be ignored was raised. The Court found in favor of the revenue, stating that the increase in discounts from 2% to 2.8% and the corresponding substantial amount disallowed required proper verification and could not be treated ad hoc.

In conclusion, the Court allowed the appeal and directed the issue to be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for further enquiry and findings in accordance with the law.