2018 (6) TMI 690 - AT - Income Tax

Disallowance u/s 14A read with Rule 8D with regard to the interest expenditure - Held that - Following the judicial pronouncements in case of PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3 VERSUS NIRMA CREDIT AND CAPITAL PVT. LTD 2017 (9) TMI 485 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT we are in agreement with the contention of learned AR that disallowance u/s 14A should be made with respect to the net interest expenditure - accordingly, AO is directed to recompute the disallowance on the net interest expenditure after giving credit for the interest earned by the assessee. Expenses towards repairs & Maintenance of building - capital or revenue in nature - Held that - If the advantage consists merely in facilitating the assessee s trading operations or enabling the management and conduct of the assessee s business to be carried on more efficiently or more profitably while leaving the fixed capital untouched, the expenditure would be on revenue account, even though the advantage may endure for an indefinite future - hence after considering the nature of each and every expenditure the CIT(A) reached to the finding that expenditure so incurred on repair etc., was Revenue in nature - appeal of revenue is dismissed - Decided in favor of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Disallowance under section 94(7)
2. Disallowance of interest expenditure under section 14A
3. Treatment of expenditure on civil work as revenue or capital in nature

Analysis:
1. Disallowance under section 94(7):
The Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed a certain amount under section 94(7) during the scrutiny assessment. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) partly allowed the expenditure incurred on civil work by treating it as revenue in nature but confirmed the disallowance made under section 14A and section 94(7) of the Income Tax Act. Both the assessee and the Revenue filed cross-appeals against this order. The Tribunal directed the AO to recompute the disallowance on the net interest expenditure after considering the interest earned by the assessee, in line with judicial pronouncements.

2. Disallowance of interest expenditure under section 14A:
The Tribunal, following judicial precedents, agreed with the contention that disallowance under section 14A should be made with respect to the net interest expenditure. It directed the AO to recompute the disallowance after giving credit for the interest earned by the assessee. The Tribunal referred to specific cases and held that the disallowance should be based on net interest paid, not gross interest, as argued by the Revenue.

3. Treatment of expenditure on civil work:
The assessee company had incurred expenses on repairs and maintenance of a building acquired from CIDCO. The company considered these expenses as revenue expenses necessary for running the business effectively and efficiently. The Tribunal found that the expenditure on repair work, renovation, civil, and electrical interior work did not create any new asset of enduring nature but was essential for business operations. Citing various judicial decisions, the Tribunal concluded that such expenses were revenue in nature and allowable. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) had already analyzed the issue thoroughly and concluded that the expenditure on repair work was revenue in nature, which did not require any interference.

In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal and allowed the assessee's appeal in part, based on the reevaluation and reclassification of the disallowed expenses under section 14A and the treatment of expenditure on civil work as revenue in nature.