9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (10) TMI 626 - HC - Income TaxDeduction u/s 80IA - only the profit making power generating unit of the assessee should be taken into account and not the loss making units in computing the total income of the assessee for its eligible business - HELD THAT - Issue decided against the revenue by placing reliance on decision of this court in SWARNAGIRI WIRE INSULATIONS (P.) LTD. 2013 (2) TMI 202 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT . The aforesaid position was not disputed by learned counsel for the revenue. Disallowance u/s 14A - HELD THAT - Assessee has invested a sum of ₹ 26,61,011/- from its own capital and the claim of the assessee for an amount of ₹ 14,40,471/- under Section 14A of the Act has been remitted to the Assessing Officer to decide the claim in accordance with law. The aforesaid concurrent findings of fact recorded by the Tribunal by no stretch of imagination can be said to be either perverse or based on no evidence. No element of perversity has been brought to our notice, therefore, it is not necessary for us to answer the aforesaid substantial question of law.
Issues:
1. Interpretation of Section 80IA of the Income Tax Act for eligible business deductions. 2. Application of Section 14A of the Act concerning disallowance of expenditure. 3. Judicial review of Tribunal's decision on profit-making and loss-making units for deduction under Section 80IA. Issue 1: Interpretation of Section 80IA of the Income Tax Act for eligible business deductions The appeal pertained to the Assessment Year 2008-09 with the primary question being the correct computation of total income for eligible business deductions under Section 80IA of the Act. The revenue contended that all profit-making and loss-making units should be aggregated for deduction calculation under Section 80IA(1) and 80IA(5). It was argued that the Tribunal erred in not considering the aggregation of units and set off under Section 70 of the Act. The revenue also highlighted the applicability of the amendment to Section 14A(2) read with Rule 8D from the relevant assessment year. The Tribunal's decision was challenged based on the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer regarding expenditure claims under Section 14A of the Act. Issue 2: Application of Section 14A of the Act concerning disallowance of expenditure The dispute also revolved around the disallowance of expenditure under Section 14A of the Act. The revenue argued that the Assessing Officer had valid reasons to disallow the expenditure claimed by the assessee under Section 14A. Reference was made to the decision in 'GODREJ & BOYCE MFG. CO. LTD. VS. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX' to support the contention. Conversely, the assessee maintained that no disallowance was warranted as the investment was made from surplus funds. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal had allowed the claim under Section 14A to a certain extent, leading to a partial remittance of the matter to the Assessing Officer for further examination. Issue 3: Judicial review of Tribunal's decision on profit-making and loss-making units for deduction under Section 80IA The Tribunal's decision on considering only the profit-making power generating unit for deduction under Section 80IA was a key aspect of the appeal. The revenue challenged this approach, arguing that all units, both profit-making and loss-making, should be considered for computing total income. The Tribunal's decision was compared to the judgment in 'COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ANOTHER VS. SWARNAGIRI WIRE INSULATIONS (P.) LTD' to support the revenue's stance. The High Court, based on previous decisions and legal principles, upheld the Tribunal's findings against the revenue, emphasizing the Tribunal's role as a fact-finding authority and the need for a foundation in pleadings for questioning legal aspects. In conclusion, the High Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the Tribunal's decisions on issues related to Section 80IA deductions and Section 14A expenditure disallowance. The judgment highlighted the importance of factual findings by the Tribunal and the limited scope for judicial interference unless there are substantial legal grounds or perversity in the decisions.
|
