9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (8) TMI 1250 - AT - Income TaxDepreciation claim on leased assets u/s 32 - Held that - following the decision for earlier year, claim of depreciation allowed, Decided in favor of assessee. Disallowance u/s 14A - Held that - when own funds in the form of share capital and reserves is in excess of amount invested in shares and securities which yielded exempt income, then no disallowance can be made towards interest expenditure u/s 14A of the Act. Claim of bad debts - Any amount of loan outstanding in respect of bill discounting - money lent in the ordinary course of business of banking or money lending - fulfilling the conditions prescribed u/s 36(1)(iii) and 36(2) - Held that - The CIT(A), after considering relevant submissions of the assessee has rightly deleted addition made by the AO. - Decided against the revenue. Higher rate of depreciation @40% instead of 25% - assets being motor lorries, motor buses and motor taxis - Held that - leasing out of the trucks by the assessee to others for consideration amounts to running the same on hire and will entitle to claim for higher depreciation. - Claim of the assessee allowed. Addition of late payment compensation charges on non performing assets. - the assessee is following method of accounting whereby it is accounting interest and late payment charges on NPAs on accrual basis; however, for the purpose of taxation, the same is considered on receipt basis - Held that - AO has made addition towards late payment compensation charges on accrual basis and also made similar addition on said charges on receipt basis in the subsequent financial years. Since we have already directed the AO to make addition towards late payment compensation charges on receipt basis in the year of receipt of such charges, addition made on accrual basis in the impugned assessment year is directed to be deleted. However, the fact with regard to the claim of the assessee that it has offered to tax such charges on receipt basis in AY 2002-03 are not clear from the orders of the lower authorities. - Mattered remanded back for verification. Decided partly in favor of assessee.
Issues Involved:
1. Disallowance of depreciation on leased assets. 2. Disallowance of penalty for late payment of sales tax. 3. Disallowance of expenditure related to exempt income under Section 14A. 4. Disallowance of software license fees. 5. Disallowance of bad debts written off. 6. Disallowance of excess depreciation on motor lorries, motor buses, and motor taxis. 7. Denial of exemption under Section 54EA before setting off long-term capital loss. 8. Addition of late payment compensation charges on non-performing assets (NPAs). 9. Disallowance of advertisement expenditure under Section 37(1). 10. Disallowance of interest expenditure under Section 37(1) for contravention of law. Issue-wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Disallowance of Depreciation on Leased Assets: The assessee claimed depreciation on leased assets, which the AO disallowed, considering the transactions as finance/loan transactions. The ITAT referenced its own prior decisions and the Supreme Court ruling in ICDS vs CIT, confirming that the assessee is eligible for depreciation on leased assets. The Tribunal directed the AO to delete the disallowance. 2. Disallowance of Penalty for Late Payment of Sales Tax: The assessee paid a penalty for the late payment of sales tax, which was disallowed by the AO. The assessee chose not to press this ground, keeping the issue open for future challenges. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed this ground as not pressed. 3. Disallowance of Expenditure Related to Exempt Income Under Section 14A: The AO disallowed interest and administrative expenses related to exempt income. The ITAT, referencing previous decisions, held that no disallowance can be made when the assessee's own funds exceed the investments yielding exempt income. The Tribunal directed the AO to restrict the disallowance of administrative expenses to 1% of the exempt income, which was calculated at ?10 lakhs. 4. Disallowance of Software License Fees: The AO disallowed a portion of the software license fees, treating it as capital expenditure and allowing depreciation instead. The assessee chose not to press this ground, leading to its dismissal by the Tribunal. 5. Disallowance of Bad Debts Written Off: The AO disallowed the principal amount of bad debts written off, arguing it was never credited to the P&L account. The ITAT, referencing the Bombay High Court decision in Shreyas M Morakia vs CIT, held that the principal amount in bill discounting business is deductible as a trading loss under Section 36(1)(vii). The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the disallowance. 6. Disallowance of Excess Depreciation on Motor Lorries, Motor Buses, and Motor Taxis: The AO allowed depreciation at a lower rate, arguing the assets were not used for hiring. The ITAT, referencing its own prior decisions and the Madras High Court ruling in CIT vs Madan & Co, held that leasing out trucks for consideration entitles the assessee to higher depreciation. The Tribunal directed the AO to allow the claimed depreciation. 7. Denial of Exemption Under Section 54EA Before Setting Off Long-term Capital Loss: The AO denied the exemption under Section 54EA, arguing that short-term capital loss should be set off first. The ITAT, referencing the Madras High Court decision in CIT vs Vijay M Mahatani and a CBDT circular, held that the assessee can claim the exemption before setting off the loss. The Tribunal directed the AO to allow the exemption as claimed. 8. Addition of Late Payment Compensation Charges on Non-performing Assets (NPAs): The AO added late payment compensation charges on NPAs on an accrual basis. The ITAT, referencing the Supreme Court decision in CIT vs Vasisht Chay Vyapar, held that such charges should be taxed on a receipt basis. The Tribunal directed the AO to verify if the charges were offered to tax in the subsequent year and delete the addition if confirmed. 9. Disallowance of Advertisement Expenditure Under Section 37(1): The AO disallowed expenditure on contributions to a Ganesh festival, arguing it had no business relevance. The ITAT upheld the AO's decision, reversing the CIT(A)'s deletion of the addition, stating that the expenditure had no nexus with the assessee's business activities. 10. Disallowance of Interest Expenditure Under Section 37(1) for Contravention of Law: The AO disallowed notional interest on loans to a subsidiary, citing contravention of RBI guidelines. The ITAT found no evidence of penalties or fines imposed by the RBI and held that the guidelines were advisory. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the disallowance, finding the AO's action unjustified. Conclusion: The appeals were partly allowed for both the assessee and the revenue, with specific directions for the AO to follow the Tribunal's findings and make necessary adjustments. The Tribunal's decisions were based on precedent cases, legal principles, and clarifications from higher courts and authorities.
|
