2000 (7) TMI 247 - AT - Income Tax

Summary

Issues: Disallowance of deduction under s. 80HHC of the IT Act based on prima facie adjustment under s. 143(1)(a) of the IT Act.

Analysis:
1. The assessee, a partnership firm engaged in the export business of mica and its bye-products, filed a return of income showing nil income for the assessment year 1996-97, which was processed under s. 143(1)(a) of the IT Act by excluding interest income for determining allowable deduction under s. 80HHC.

2. The assessee contended that the interest income from fixed deposits had a nexus with the export business, as the fixed deposits were made from the disclosed turnover and business profit. The assessee argued that the interest income should be considered along with the deduction under s. 80HHC, and since it was a disputed point, no disallowance should have been made by way of adjustment.

3. The CIT(A) held that the deduction under s. 80HHC was allowable only on the income of the export business and not on interest income from fixed deposits in Indian banks. The CIT(A) reasoned that the interest income from fixed deposits did not qualify as income earned from the export of goods or merchandise, and thus, was not eligible for deduction under s. 80HHC.

4. The authorized representative of the assessee cited various decisions and circulars to support the contention that interest income on fixed deposits related to the export business should be considered as business income eligible for deduction under s. 80HHC. The representative highlighted the direct nexus between the fixed deposits and the export business, emphasizing that the matter was debatable and therefore, no disallowance should have been made.

5. The Tribunal, after considering the submissions and evidence, held that the interest income on fixed deposits with a direct nexus to the export business should be considered as business income eligible for deduction under s. 80HHC. The Tribunal emphasized that the matter was controversial and debatable, and thus, the disallowance made by the AO was unjustified. The order of the CIT(A) was reversed, and the appeal of the assessee was allowed.

This analysis demonstrates the dispute regarding the treatment of interest income from fixed deposits in relation to the deduction under s. 80HHC, highlighting the Tribunal's decision in favor of considering such interest income as part of the business income eligible for deduction.