1993 (5) TMI 54 - AT - Income Tax

Summary

Issues:
1. Disallowance under section 43B of the IT Act.
2. Entitlement for investment allowance under section 32A of the IT Act.
3. Calculation of interest on interest-free loans.
4. Disallowance of ex gratia payments.
5. Disallowance of sundry balances written off.
6. Disallowance under section 80VV of the Act.
7. Mentioning of carried forward losses/allowances/reliefs in the order.

Analysis:

1. The first issue pertains to the disallowance under section 43B of the IT Act. The CIT(A) deleted the addition of Rs. 3,85,109 after verifying that the amounts were paid within the statutory time prescribed. The Tribunal upheld the decision, citing the decision of the Patna High Court. The appeal on this ground was rejected.

2. The second issue revolves around the entitlement for investment allowance under section 32A of the IT Act. The CIT(A) denied the claim, stating a distinction between manufacturing and processing activities. However, the Tribunal held that the activity of texturizing yarn constitutes manufacturing, allowing the investment allowance based on the CBDT Circular and the decision of the Bombay High Court. Therefore, this ground of appeal was allowed.

3. Regarding the calculation of interest on interest-free loans, the Tribunal found discrepancies in the treatment of loans advanced to a subsidiary. The matter was remanded back to the Assessing Officer for a thorough examination in light of various submissions and legal precedents cited by the counsel.

4. The issue of disallowance of ex gratia payments was analyzed, with the Tribunal upholding the decision of the Revenue authorities. The deduction was disallowed as the payment was considered excessive for a company incurring losses, and there was no agreement mandating such payments. The ground of appeal was rejected.

5. The Tribunal addressed the disallowance of sundry balances written off, where the CIT(A) confirmed the disallowance based on the unrecovered deposit and other discrepancies. The Tribunal found no justification to interfere in this matter and rejected the ground of appeal.

6. The disallowance under section 80VV of the Act was discussed, with the Tribunal noting insufficient information regarding the nature of the expenses claimed. The issue was remanded to the Assessing Officer for further examination and clarification on the expenses related to income-tax matters.

7. Lastly, the contention regarding the mentioning of carried forward losses/allowances/reliefs in the order was considered. The Tribunal observed that no evidence was presented to show any mistake in the ITO's action, and thus, no interference was warranted. However, the assessee was reminded of the right to seek rectification if entitled to any carry forward or set off of losses under the law.

In conclusion, the Departmental appeal was dismissed, while the assessee's appeal was partly allowed on specific grounds as detailed above.