2018 (10) TMI 580 - AT - Income Tax

Disallowance of R & D Expenditure - Claim of deduction on the expenditure on Research and Development u/s.35(1) - mandation of necessary approval taken from the prescribed authority - Held that - As held by Hon ble Karnataka High Court TEJAS NETWORKS LTD. VERSUS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 12 (4), BENGALURU 2015 (4) TMI 1064 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT that on a plain reading of section 35(2AB) (1), deduction is allowable u/s. 35(2AB) if it is approved by the prescribed authority. AO has no jurisdiction to examine the correctness of the certificate issued by the prescribed authority. In the present case, a categorical finding is given by AO which remains uncontroverted that the assessee has not produced necessary approval taken from the prescribed authority namely, Secretary, Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, Govt. of India. Since in the present case, no approval of prescribed authority is available, the assessee s claim for deduction is not allowable - Decided against the assessee.

Issues Involved:
- Deduction on expenditure for Research and Development
- Applicability of judgment of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court
- Approval from prescribed authority for Research and Development expenses

Issue 1: Deduction on expenditure for Research and Development
The appeal was filed against the order of ld. CIT(A)-14, LTU, Bangalore for Assessment Year 2010-11. The assessee claimed deduction on expenditure for Research and Development, which was disallowed by the AO due to lack of necessary approvals and evidence. The assessee argued that the expenses were paid to its subsidiary for research activities, but failed to provide sufficient material to justify the claim. The Tribunal examined the contentions and noted that the assessee did not carry out the research and development activity itself, but paid the expenses to its subsidiary. As per the judgment of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court, deduction under section 35(2AB) is allowable only if approved by the prescribed authority. Since no approval was obtained in this case, the claim for deduction was not allowed, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal.

Issue 2: Applicability of judgment of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court
The Tribunal analyzed the judgment of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Tejas Networks Ltd. vs. DCIT, which emphasized the requirement of approval from the prescribed authority for claiming deductions under section 35(2AB) for Research and Development expenses. The High Court held that the AO exceeded jurisdiction by examining the correctness of the certificate issued by the prescribed authority. In the present case, the AO found that the assessee did not produce necessary approvals from the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, Govt. of India. The Tribunal, in line with the High Court's judgment, concluded that without the required approval, the deduction claim could not be allowed.

Issue 3: Approval from prescribed authority for Research and Development expenses
The Tribunal highlighted the importance of obtaining approval from the prescribed authority for claiming deductions under section 35(2AB) for Research and Development expenses. The judgment of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court reiterated that deductions are allowable only if the expenditure is approved by the prescribed authority. In this case, since the assessee failed to provide necessary approvals from the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, Govt. of India, the claim for deduction on Research and Development expenses was disallowed. The Tribunal's decision was based on the absence of required approvals, aligning with the legal provisions and precedents set by the High Court.

This comprehensive analysis of the judgment showcases the key issues involved, the arguments presented, and the legal principles applied by the Tribunal in reaching its decision regarding the deduction claim for Research and Development expenses.

← Previous Next →