2012 (12) TMI 325 - AT - Income Tax

Deduction being interest payable to HDFC - CIT(A) allowed the claim - Held that - HDFC, institution in question, is not a Schedule Bank/ Public Financial Institution- it is non-banking financial institution. In these circumstances, it is not covered by provision of sec. 43B(e) , thus addition was made to the income of the assessee need to be deducted - in favour of assessee. Disallowance of prior period expenses - Held that - Considering the assessee s contention that amounts in question were bad debts, but in the accounts same were disclosed as prior period expenses but the assessee in the revised return also had not claimed the said amount as bad debts, thus matter should be restricted back to the file of the AO - Also considering that First Appellate Authority first allowed the same as bad debts and later on passed an order u/s.154 with regard to an amount of Rs.1.22 Crores, the issue need to be reconsidered - in favour of assessee by way of remand. Disallowance of interest expenses - Held that - FAA after considering the submission of the assessee held that though the advances were made to group concerns from the borrowed funds, yet same were advanced for commercial expediency, that advance were in pursuance of an agreement, that the assessee was granted permission to publish a magazine without payment or royalty and reduced payment of assets usage charges but had not mentioned as how the payment of Rs.2.33 Crores commensurate with asset usage charges, that agreement of royalty reduction and usage charges was not available to the AO - the matter should be remanded back to the A.O for fresh consideration - in favour of Revenue for statistical purposes. Refund of sales tax paid in excess of demand - addition to income - Held that - FAA in appellate proceedings held that sales tax refund did not contain any interest paid by the sales tax department & directed the AO to verify the addition and delete the addition if there was no part of interest payment on the refund. From the orders available it is found that neither the AO nor the FAA has examined the issue of refund with reference to the provisions of section 43(B), so the matter is being remitted back to AO for further verification and to take a final decision - in favour of Revenue for statistical purposes. Disallowance of employees contribution to ESIC - Held that - Considering assessee s submission that contribution to provident fund and ESIC were made before the filing of return of income the matter should be restored back to AO for verification of claim made by the assessee - in favour of assessee by way of remand.

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Appeal by the Assessing Officer (AO) regarding various deductions and disallowances.
2. Appeal by the assessee challenging additions made by the Commissioner (Appeals).
3. Cross objections by the assessee regarding disallowance of employees' contributions to provident fund and ESIC.

Issue 1 - Appeal by the AO:
The AO contested the CIT(A)'s decision on several grounds, including allowing deduction for interest payable to HDFC Bank, bad debts, disallowance of interest expenses, and addition on account of sales tax refund. The AO argued that certain expenses were not allowable, such as interest payable to HDFC Bank and bad debts, as they were not adequately substantiated. The ITAT, after reviewing the arguments, found that HDFC Bank was not a Schedule Bank or Public Financial Institution, thus not covered by the relevant provision. The ITAT remitted the matter back to the AO for fresh adjudication on the bad debts issue.

Issue 2 - Appeal by the Assessee:
The assessee challenged additions made by the Commissioner (Appeals) related to interest due to Global Trust Bank, interest on debentures, payments to various entities, including professional fees and purchase of computers, and other payments. The Commissioner (Appeals) had confirmed these additions, but the ITAT found discrepancies in the treatment of these amounts as bad debts or prior period expenses. The ITAT remitted the matter back to the AO for further verification and substantiation by the assessee.

Issue 3 - Cross objections by the Assessee:
The cross objections raised by the assessee pertained to the disallowance of employees' contributions to provident fund and ESIC. The AO had disallowed these contributions as they were not paid on due dates. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the disallowance, but the ITAT decided to restore the matter back to the AO for verification of the claim made by the assessee.

In conclusion, the ITAT partially allowed the appeals and cross objections filed by both the Revenue and the assessee, remitting certain issues back to the AO for further examination and verification. The judgments provided detailed analysis and interpretation of the legal provisions and factual circumstances surrounding the deductions and disallowances in question, ensuring a fair and just decision based on the merits of each issue raised.