Tribunal's Directions on Appeal: Depreciation Allowed, Interest Disallowances Deleted, Transfer Pricing Adjustments

The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, providing specific directions for fresh adjudication and verification of various claims and disallowances by the Assessing Officer and DRP. Notably, depreciation on a non-compete fee was allowed as an intangible asset, interest disallowances were deleted, and adjustments were directed for CENVAT credit in stock valuation. The Tribunal also dismissed certain claims, such as bad debt deduction and deduction under Section 80HHHC. Transfer pricing adjustments were made, and unresolved issues were remitted for further consideration.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Claim of depreciation on non-compete fee.
2. Adoption of actual cost for computing depreciation.
3. Disallowance of interest on borrowed funds under Section 36(1)(iii).
4. Disallowance of interest on amounts advanced to sister concerns and directors.
5. Addition under Section 41(1) for sundry creditors.
6. Write-off of non-moving and obsolete finished goods.
7. Inclusion of CENVAT credit in opening and closing stock.
8. Disallowance of bad debt written-off.
9. Deduction under Section 80HHHC while computing book profit under Section 115JB.
10. Adjustment to the arm's length price by adopting TNMM instead of CUP.
11. Interest on interest-free loan to Piramal Glass, U.K., and compensation for providing corporate guarantee to Gujarat Glass International.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Claim of Depreciation on Non-Compete Fee:
The assessee claimed depreciation on a non-compete fee capitalized over various assets. The Tribunal in A.Y. 1999-2000 rejected this claim, but in A.Y. 2001-02, the Tribunal allowed it, treating the non-compete fee as an intangible asset under Section 32(1)(ii). The Tribunal followed the decisions of the Madras and Karnataka High Courts, which allowed depreciation on non-compete fees, and thus allowed the assessee's claim.

2. Adoption of Actual Cost for Computing Depreciation:
The dispute was whether depreciation should be computed on the value recorded in the books of the seller-company or on the WDV. The Tribunal remitted the matter back to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration, consistent with the decisions in A.Y. 1999-2000 and 2001-02.

3. Disallowance of Interest on Borrowed Funds under Section 36(1)(iii):
The Assessing Officer disallowed interest on borrowed funds used for investment in subsidiaries, considering it not for business purposes. The DRP directed to verify if the investments were for promoting the business, which the Tribunal upheld, noting that the assessee earned substantial revenue from these investments. The Tribunal deleted the disallowance.

4. Disallowance of Interest on Amounts Advanced to Sister Concerns and Directors:
The Assessing Officer disallowed interest on loans advanced to sister concerns and directors. The Tribunal noted that similar disallowances were deleted in A.Y. 2001-02, finding the advances were for commercial expediency. The Tribunal deleted the disallowance, considering the Transfer Pricing Officer had already made adjustments.

5. Addition under Section 41(1) for Sundry Creditors:
The Assessing Officer added sundry creditors pending for more than three years under Section 41(1). The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to verify if there was remission or cessation of liability and if the amounts were paid back or offered as income in subsequent years. The Tribunal allowed the ground for statistical purposes.

6. Write-off of Non-Moving and Obsolete Finished Goods:
The Assessing Officer disallowed the write-off of non-moving and obsolete inventories. The Tribunal noted that the assessee had added back the provision for obsolete inventory and reduced the actual write-off amount. The Tribunal restored the issue to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication, ensuring no double disallowance.

7. Inclusion of CENVAT Credit in Opening and Closing Stock:
The Assessing Officer included unutilized CENVAT credit in the closing stock, which the Tribunal directed to be adjusted in both opening and closing stock as per Section 145A. The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to follow judicial precedents and provide due opportunity to the assessee.

8. Disallowance of Bad Debt Written-Off:
The assessee claimed deduction for bad debt written-off in A.Y. 2005-06, which was disallowed. The Tribunal noted that the first appellate authority allowed the claim in A.Y. 2005-06, hence the amount received in the impugned year should be assessed as income. The Tribunal dismissed the ground.

9. Deduction under Section 80HHHC while Computing Book Profit under Section 115JB:
The Tribunal dismissed the assessee's claim for deduction under Section 80HHHC while computing book profit under Section 115JB due to the retrospective deletion of the relevant clause by the Finance Act, 2011.

10. Adjustment to the Arm's Length Price by Adopting TNMM Instead of CUP:
The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to compute the margin under TNMM only for A.E. sales, not for non-A.E. sales, ensuring the proper application of transfer pricing provisions.

11. Interest on Interest-Free Loan to Piramal Glass, U.K., and Compensation for Providing Corporate Guarantee to Gujarat Glass International:
The Tribunal restored the issue to the DRP for adjudication, noting that the DRP had not decided on the matter and the assessee had filed a petition under Section 154.

Conclusion:
The appeal was partly allowed, with the Tribunal providing specific directions for fresh adjudication and verification of various claims and disallowances by the Assessing Officer and DRP.

---