2013 (12) TMI 129 - AT - Income Tax

Interest on custom duty - accrual of expenses - Held that - The accounts have been prpared on a non going concern basis and it is also mentioned that the management had no intention to continue the business in the unforeseeable future - The assessee had decided to close down the operation as the project was not viable - Therefore,only the expenses required for maintaining the corporate identity of the company could be allowed - The interest on custom duty has the same nature as custom duty and therefore it could be allowed on payment basis - The details filed on record show that the payment had not been made this year but in the immediate preceding year and in the subsequent year - Decided against assessee. Technology transfer fee - Held that - The technical collaboration agreement had been entered into for starting a nursery for commercial production of bivoltine silk cocoons - The project ultimately became unviable and never started - Any expenditure incurred in connection with the project such as technical fees etc, has been considered as capital expenditure by CIT(A). Other expenses which are quite insignificant have also been rightly disallowed as the business has discontinued - Decided against assessee.

Issues involved:
Disallowance of expenses in assessment year 2003-04 due to business discontinuation, disallowance of interest on custom duty not related to the assessment year, disallowance of penalty on sales tax, disallowance of technology transfer fees as capital expenditure, disagreement on the allowability of expenses between the assessee and the authorities.

Analysis:

1. Disallowance of Expenses:
The appellant, engaged in manufacturing and trading, declared a loss for the assessment year 2003-04. The Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed various expenses claimed in the Profit and Loss Account due to the company being prepared as a non-going concern. The AO held that since the company ceased to be a going concern, the expenses were not allowable. The expenses included farm expenses, legal and professional fees, R&D cess, communication expenses, travelling and conveyance, technology transfer fees, interest paid on Custom Duty, and sales tax penalty. The AO disallowed most expenses as they were not incurred for carrying on the business, leading to an addition of Rs. 1,45,92,059 to the total income.

2. Disallowance of Interest on Custom Duty:
The AO noted that the interest on Custom Duty did not pertain to the assessment year under consideration and was not allowable as a deduction. The interest payment was made in previous and subsequent years, not during the current assessment year. Therefore, the interest was deemed non-allowable.

3. Disallowance of Technology Transfer Fees:
Regarding the technology transfer fees paid to Mitsubishi Corporation (MC), the AO disallowed the expenses as capital in nature, stating that the termination agreement was self-serving and lacked contractual value. The AO held that the expenses were not incurred exclusively for business purposes. The AO added the technology transfer fees to the total income, leading to disagreement between the assessee and the authorities.

4. Disagreement and Appeal:
The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) upheld the AO's findings, stating that since the business had discontinued, most expenses were not allowable. The CIT(A) agreed with the disallowance of interest on Custom Duty and sales tax penalty. The CIT(A) also deemed the technology transfer fees as capital expenditure. The appellant disagreed with the disallowance and appealed to the Tribunal, arguing that the business had not closed down entirely.

5. Tribunal's Decision:
The Tribunal reviewed the case, considering the closure of the business and the nature of expenses claimed. It upheld the disallowance of expenses due to the business discontinuation. The Tribunal found no error in the CIT(A)'s decision to confirm the disallowance made by the AO. Consequently, the appeal of the assessee was dismissed.

This detailed analysis highlights the key issues addressed in the legal judgment concerning the disallowance of expenses, interest on Custom Duty, technology transfer fees, and the disagreement between the assessee and the tax authorities regarding the allowability of expenses in the context of business discontinuation for the assessment year 2003-04.

← Previous Next →