2021 (11) TMI 376 - AT - Income Tax

Allowable business expenditure - Expenses related to project of NTPC which according to the A.O. was incurred prior to setting up of the business - HELD THAT - We note that in the assessees's own case, the Tribunal upheld the view of the Ld. CIT(A) for A.Y. 2012-13 and A.Y. 2013-14, and held that assessee has set up its business. And further the Tribunal did not interfere with the partial confirmation of the disallowance made by AO regarding the claim of pre-operative expenses as revenue expenditure viz, legal and professional expenses, community welfare expenses, environmental expenses, project expenses, salaries which were directly attributable to the project of NTPC and the said expenses to be capitalized. And it is further noted that the Tribunal confirmed the action of Ld. CIT(A) allowing other expenditure claims as revenue expenditure which were exclusively related to the running of the business. Thus, we note that for A.Y. 2012-13 and A.Y. 2013-14, so far as the expenditure related to the NTPC project was concerned, the Ld. CIT(A) held it to be expenses related to pre-operative stage and disallowed it as revenue expenditure and directed it to be capitalized, which action of Ld. CIT(A) has been upheld by the Tribunal 2021 (11) TMI 363 - ITAT JODHPUR - And we note that in those appeals, the assessee has not pressed the C.O. which was challenging the action of the Ld. CIT(A) directing the capitalization of expenditure related to expenditure incurred in respect of NTPC project. So the action of Ld. CIT(A) to that extend got crystallized. Appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Dismissal of general ground in appeal
2. Allowing adjustment of carry forward business losses with current year income
3. Allowing expenses related to NTPC project incurred prior to business setup

Analysis:

Issue 1: Dismissal of General Ground in Appeal
The Revenue appealed against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-18, Kolkata for A.Y. 2014-15. The Tribunal noted that while the Revenue raised three grounds of appeal, Ground No. 3 was a general ground and thus needed to be dismissed.

Issue 2: Allowing Adjustment of Carry Forward Business Losses
Regarding Ground No. 2, the Tribunal observed that the appeal against allowing adjustment of carry forward business losses with current year income did not stem from the Ld. CIT(A)'s order. The Tribunal dismissed this ground as the Revenue failed to provide sufficient evidence to support their claim.

Issue 3: Allowing Expenses Related to NTPC Project
The primary issue revolved around the action of the Ld. CIT(A) in allowing expenses related to the NTPC project, which the Assessing Officer (A.O.) deemed as pre-operative expenses. The A.O. contended that the business had not commenced, and thus, the expenses were not considered as revenue expenditures. The Ld. CIT(A) partially allowed the assessee's appeal, holding that expenses directly related to the NTPC project should be capitalized. The Tribunal upheld this decision based on previous rulings for A.Y. 2012-13 and 2013-14, where the Ld. CIT(A) directed the capitalization of expenses related to the NTPC project. As the assessee did not challenge this decision, the Tribunal confirmed the partial relief granted by the Ld. CIT(A) in this case as well.

In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, upholding the Ld. CIT(A)'s decision to allow expenses related to the NTPC project to be capitalized. The Tribunal's ruling was based on consistency with previous judgments in the assessee's own case for A.Y. 2012-13 and 2013-14, where similar issues were addressed and decided in favor of capitalization of project-related expenses.