2015 (12) TMI 617 - AT - Income Tax

Disallowance of business expenditure - Held that - The assessee has already purchased residential flat for the purpose of resale/lease, and therefore assessee was apparently ready to do its business. Under these circumstances, it can be said that the business is set up by the assessee during the year under consideration. For the deductibility of expenses incurred after this stage, earning of the business income is not a mandatory condition under the law. The assessee may not have been successful in getting customers or earning the business income, but if the assessee has done requisite preparations and if the assessee can be said to be in a position to cater to its customers, then it can be said that business is set up and it would amount to carrying on the business and accordingly the expenses would stand allowable to the assessee, irrespective of the fact whether actually assessee got any customer and earned any business income during the year or not. Thus, the disallowance made by the AO is contrary to law and facts and the same is deleted and the AO is directed to allow the expenses claimed by the assessee - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
Disallowance of business expenditure and set off against interest income under section 71 of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2008-09.

Analysis:
The appellant filed an appeal against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for disallowing business expenditure of &8377; 2,69,275 and not allowing set off against interest income. The AO disallowed the expenses as no business income was earned during the year. The Ld. CIT(A) upheld the disallowance. The appellant argued that routine business expenses were wrongly disallowed. The tribunal considered the definition of 'previous year' under section 3 of the Income Tax Act, emphasizing that setting up of business is distinct from commencement of business. Various judgments were cited to support that expenses incurred for business purposes are allowable even if income has not been earned or benefit accrued immediately. The tribunal noted that the appellant had purchased residential flats for resale/lease, indicating readiness to conduct business. Thus, the expenses were deemed allowable as the business was set up during the year, irrespective of actual income earned. The disallowance by the AO was deemed contrary to law and facts, leading to the allowance of the claimed expenses.

The tribunal highlighted that readiness to discharge business functions signifies setting up of business, distinct from commencement. Expenses incurred post setting up are deductible as revenue expenditure. Citing relevant case laws, the tribunal emphasized that business set up is established when preparations are made to cater to customers, regardless of actual income earned during the year. The tribunal concluded that the appellant's business was set up during the year, justifying the allowance of claimed expenses. The disallowance by the AO was deemed incorrect, leading to the direction to allow the expenses amounting to &8377; 2,69,275. Consequently, the revised ground of the appellant was allowed, and the appeal was partly allowed.

In conclusion, the tribunal's judgment revolved around the disallowance of business expenditure and the set off against interest income for the assessment year 2008-09. The tribunal emphasized the distinction between setting up and commencement of business, highlighting that readiness to conduct business activities justifies the allowance of expenses, irrespective of actual income earned during the year. The tribunal's decision favored the appellant, allowing the claimed expenses and overturning the disallowance made by the AO.