2013 (12) TMI 1058 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal grants appeal, directs AO on tax matters

Thirumalai Chemicals Limited. Versus DCIT, OSD 1(1), Mumbai

The tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the assessee, directing the AO to delete the disallowance of expenses on catalysts under section 40(a)(i) of the ... Disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) – Expenses on catalysts - Held that:- A perusal of the copies of the invoice clearly indicates that the relevant product involved in the purchase is 'catalyst for phthalic anhydride' in the form of ring - This does not suggest that the assessee has purchased any 'patent, invention, model, design, secret formulae or process or trade mark or similar property' which in fact requires the element of the purchase of an intangible asset - Neither the findings of the AO nor that of the Ld. CIT(A) is based on any evidence to support that the payment was ‘royalty” - Decided in favour of assesse. Valuation of stock – Held that:- Following assessee's own case for the assessment year 2006-07 - All the relevant debits and credits (purchases, sales etc) in the profit and loss account should be grossed up – The issue was restored for fresh decision. Disallowance under section 14A – Held that:- Following assessee's own case for the assessment year 2006-07 - Rule 8D is not applicable prior to assessment year 2008-09 – The quantum of disallowance should be computed using some reasonable method - The quantum of disallowance was restricted to 2% of dividend income – The issue was restored for fresh decision. Validity of ground for appeal u/s 246A - Credit for TDS not granted – Held that:- Following M. Chockalingam & M. Meyyappan v. CIT [1962 (10) TMI 48 - SUPREME COURT] - The expression, viz., 'amount of tax determined' as employed in section 246(1)(a), encompasses not only the determination of the amount of tax on the total income but also any other act of omission which has the effect of reducing or enhancing the total amount payable by the assessee – This is a valid ground acceptable u/s 246A - The issue was restored for fresh decision. Issues:1. Disallowance of expenses on catalysts under section 40(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act.2. Addition to closing stock value under section 145A of the Act.3. Disallowance under section 14A of the Act invoking Rule 8D.4. Disallowance of employee's contribution to Provident Fund deposited late.5. Non-adjudication of Grounds No. 5 & 6.6. Dismissal of TDS credit by AO and Ld. CIT(A).Issue 1 - Disallowance of expenses on catalysts:The appeal challenged the disallowance of expenses on catalysts under section 40(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act. The assessee contended that the purchase of a consumable product like catalyst did not involve the purchase of a patent or copyright, hence should not be considered as payment of 'royalty.' The tribunal found that the purchase of the catalyst did not involve the purchase of any intangible asset as defined in the Act. The decision of the AO and Ld. CIT(A) was based on presumptions and assumptions without proper evidence. Consequently, the tribunal set aside the decision of Ld. CIT(A) and directed the AO to delete the addition.Issue 2 - Addition to closing stock value:The issue involved making an addition to the closing stock value under section 145A of the Act. The tribunal noted that the matter had been decided previously in the assessee's own case for the assessment year 2006-07. The tribunal directed the AO to decide the matter afresh in accordance with the directions given in the previous order. Therefore, the orders passed by the AO and Ld. CIT(A) were set aside for reconsideration.Issue 3 - Disallowance under section 14A invoking Rule 8D:The issue related to the disallowance under section 14A of the Act invoking Rule 8D. The tribunal relied on the decision in the assessee's own case for the assessment year 2006-07 and directed the AO to restrict the disallowance to 2% of dividend income. The tribunal maintained consistency with the previous decision and treated this issue as allowed for statistical purposes.Issue 4 - Disallowance of employee's contribution to Provident Fund:The disallowance of the employee's contribution to Provident Fund deposited late was challenged. The tribunal referred to settled legal positions and directed the AO to ascertain the contribution made within the grace period and allow the same. Consequently, the decisions of the AO and Ld. CIT(A) were set aside, and the issue was treated as allowed for statistical purposes.Issue 5 - Non-adjudication of Grounds No. 5 & 6:Grounds No. 5 & 6 were not pressed by the assessee, and therefore, the tribunal did not adjudicate on these grounds.Issue 6 - Dismissal of TDS credit by AO and Ld. CIT(A):The final issue was the dismissal of TDS credit by the AO and Ld. CIT(A). The tribunal referred to a relevant judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and directed the AO to grant the credit for TDS in accordance with the law after due verification. Consequently, the decision of Ld. CIT(A) was set aside, and the issue was allowed for statistical purposes.In conclusion, the tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the assessee, providing detailed analysis and directions on each issue raised in the appeal.