2015 (12) TMI 195 - AT - Income Tax

Disallowance of claim of expenditure of premium paid on SLR investments - Held that - We are of the view that amortization of premium is allowable in accounting practice. As per RBI s guidelines, amortization of premium in case of assets treated as HTM (Held to Maturity) (Investments) is to be amortized divided equally over the period which is remaining for their maturity. Same has been done by assessee. Amortization of expenses has been recognized in similar circumstances in case of premium of debentures, which was also held as investments in different judgements including that of Hon ble Supreme Court in case of Madras Industrial Investment Corp.Ltd. Vs. CIT(A) (1997 (4) TMI 5 - SUPREME Court ) - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues Involved:
- Disallowance of expenses amounting to Rs. 1,47,87,955 by the Assessing Officer.
- Disallowance of premium expenditure claimed on statutory liquidity of SLR investments.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Disallowance of Expenses
The judgment involves three appeals, one by the Revenue and two by the Assessee, against separate orders of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-Gandhinagar for Assessment Years (AYs) 2009-10, 2010-11, and 2011-12. The Revenue raised grounds against the deletion of disallowance of Rs. 1,47,87,955 by the Assessing Officer, treating it as capital expenditure. The ld. CIT(A) deleted the disallowance following judicial precedents and RBI guidelines on amortization of premium. The Coordinate Bench in a previous case upheld the assessee's claim. The Tribunal, based on consistent decisions, rejected the Revenue's appeal, allowing the assessee's appeals for AYs 2010-11 and 2011-12.

Issue 2: Disallowance of Premium Expenditure
The second issue pertains to disallowance of premium expenditure claimed on statutory liquidity of SLR investments by the assessee for AYs 2010-11 and 2011-12. The Tribunal had already decided in favor of the assessee in a previous appeal related to AY 2009-10. Following a consistent view, the Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to delete the disallowance and allow the deduction of the expenditure claimed by the assessee for AYs 2010-11 and 2011-12. Consequently, the assessee's appeals for these years were allowed, while the Revenue's appeal for AY 2009-10 was dismissed.

In conclusion, the judgment addressed the issues of disallowance of expenses and premium expenditure claimed by the assessee. The Tribunal upheld the decisions in favor of the assessee based on judicial precedents and RBI guidelines, dismissing the Revenue's appeal for AY 2009-10 and allowing the assessee's appeals for AYs 2010-11 and 2011-12.