2014 (10) TMI 820 - AT - Income Tax

Classification of Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) receipts as capital: Impact of environmental considerations on tax treatment

The Tribunal determined that the amount received by the assessee as clean development mechanism (CDM) receipts should be classified as capital in nature. ... Capital receipt or Revenue receipt - Whether the amount of ₹ 49,21,087 received by the assessee on account of clean development mechanism (CDM) is capital or revenue receipt - Held that:- Similar view has been taken by the co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the cases of Sri Velayudhaswamy Spinning Mills P. Ltd. v. Deputy CIT [2015 (4) TMI 132 - ITAT CHENNAI], Sri Ambika Cotton Mills Ltd. v. Deputy CIT [2014 (3) TMI 428 - ITAT CHENNAI] and many other similar cases. - The hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the appeal of the Revenue in CIT v. My Home Power Ltd. in [2014 (6) TMI 82 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] has upheld the view taken by the Hyderabad Bench in the case of My Home Power Ltd. v. Deputy CIT [2012 (11) TMI 288 - ITAT HYDERABAD]. - amount received by the assessee on account of CDM (carbon credits) is capital in nature. The impugned order is set aside - Decided in favour of assessee. Issues:Whether the amount received by the assessee on account of clean development mechanism (CDM) is capital or revenue receiptRs.Analysis:The Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chennai heard an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-II, Coimbatore, relevant to the assessment year 2009-10. The sole issue in appeal was determining whether the amount of Rs. 49,21,087 received by the assessee as CDM receipts should be classified as capital or revenue receipt. The assessee, engaged in garment manufacture, export, and windmill power generation, claimed the CDM receipts as capital receipts in its income tax return. However, the Assessing Officer considered the CDM receipts as revenue in nature, leading to the denial of deduction under section 80-IA. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) upheld the Assessing Officer's decision, prompting the assessee to appeal before the Tribunal.In the appeal before the Tribunal, the assessee argued that previous Tribunal decisions had consistently classified CDM receipts as capital receipts. The assessee's representative cited various cases to support this contention. On the contrary, the Department's representative supported the Commissioner's order, referring to a decision by the Cochin Bench of the Tribunal regarding income from the sale of carbon credits as revenue receipts. After hearing both sides and reviewing relevant precedents, the Tribunal noted that the issue of CDM receipts had been addressed in several cases. Notably, the Hyderabad Bench of the Tribunal had classified carbon credits as capital receipts in a specific case, emphasizing that carbon credits are an entitlement arising from environmental concerns and not business activities.Further, the Tribunal highlighted similar decisions by co-ordinate Benches regarding the capital nature of carbon credits, emphasizing that such receipts do not constitute business income but rather stem from environmental considerations. The Tribunal also referenced a judgment by the Andhra Pradesh High Court upholding the Hyderabad Bench's view on the capital nature of CDM receipts. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the amount received by the assessee on account of CDM (carbon credits) should be treated as capital in nature. As a result, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed. The judgment was pronounced in open court on October 8, 2014, in Chennai.