2020 (3) TMI 387 - AT - Income Tax

Disallowance u/s 14A - suo moto disallowance by assessee - HELD THAT - No exempt income is earned by the assessee during this year therefore, we direct the Assessing Officer to restrict the disallowance suo-moto offered by the assessee at ₹ 8,20,000/-. Addition on account of presumptive basis under section 5 on advances made by assessee to its subsidiaries - HELD THAT - Assessee advanced the money to its subsidiary, which falls under the business expediency. Therefore, in the present case that the assessee advances to its subsidiary for business requirements, which may have impact on the objectives of the assessee for earning future revenue to the assessee. When it made in relation to advances. Though, it is another fact that the business of such nature did not materialized in positive outcome and the subsidiary had to close such business operation. The Hon ble Supreme Court in S.A. Builders 2006 (12) TMI 82 - SUPREME COURT held that whether expenditure may not have been incurred under any legal obligation, yet it is allowable as a business expenditure if it was incurred on grounds of commercial expediency. The case of the assessee is that the assessee has made advances to its subsidiary for business expediency. - Decided against revenue

Summary

Issues:
- Disallowance under section 14A of the Income Tax Act for Assessment Years 2013-14 and 2014-15.
- Addition of income under section 5 of the Income Tax Act.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Disallowance under section 14A:
- The appeals involved cross appeals for Assessment Years 2013-14 and 2014-15 against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) regarding disallowance under section 14A of the IT Act.
- The Assessing Officer had made significant disallowances under section 14A, which were contested by both parties.
- The Tribunal considered the fact that the assessee did not earn any exempt income during the relevant period and had voluntarily disallowed certain amounts.
- Referring to previous decisions in the assessee's own case and other precedents, the Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to restrict the disallowance to the voluntary amounts offered by the assessee.
- The Tribunal found that there was no justification for the disallowances made by the Assessing Officer and upheld the appeals of the assessee for both Assessment Years.

Issue 2: Addition of income under section 5:
- The Assessing Officer had made additions under section 5 based on presumptive income calculations related to advances made by the assessee to its subsidiaries.
- The Tribunal noted that the advances were made for business expediency, which aligned with commercial objectives.
- Citing the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in S.A. Builders, the Tribunal held that if expenditures were incurred for commercial expediency, they were allowable as business expenditures.
- The Tribunal found no infirmity in the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) who had deleted the entire addition, following the precedent set in earlier appeals of the assessee.
- No new facts or legal arguments were presented to warrant a different view, leading the Tribunal to dismiss the revenue's appeals for both Assessment Years.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeals of the assessee regarding disallowance under section 14A and dismissed the revenue's appeals concerning the addition of income under section 5 for both Assessment Years 2013-14 and 2014-15.