2014 (3) TMI 685 - AT - Income Tax

Appeals Allowed for Assessment Years, Reconsideration of FBT Expenses Required

Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Versus DCIT, Cent. Cir. 2(1), Ahmedabad

The appeals by the assessee against the orders of the CIT(A) for assessment years 2006-07, 2008-09, and 2009-10 were allowed for statistical purposes. The ... Addition made on expenses not incurred for employees - Nexus between levy of FBT to the employees - Held that:- The decision in Arvind Fashions Ltd. Vs. DCIT [2014 (3) TMI 628 - ITAT AHMEDABAD] followed - The provision of 'FBT' could not be invoked in respect of the expenses which were not incurred on employees or their family members - the 'FBT' could not be invoked on expenses which were not incurred on the employees or their family members - there is no clear cut finding recorded by the AO or the CIT(A) in their order that whether the addition made were relating to the expenditure in relation to non-employees and for the business purpose of the assessee. Assessee contended that the expenses were not related to its employees and were incurred only in relation to non-employees and for business purpose of the assessee – this, the matter is remitted back to the AO for fresh adjudication - The AO is further directed to record a clear finding that whether the expenses in question were incurred with relation to non-employees for the business purpose of the assessee as claimed by the assessee-company – Decided in favour of Assessee. Issues:- Appeal against orders of CIT(A) for assessment years 2006-07, 2008-09, and 2009-10.- Addition of expenses for Fringe Benefit Tax (FBT) not incurred for employees.- Incorrect application of provisions of section 115WB(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.- Applicability of FBT on expenses related to non-employees for business purposes.- Interpretation of legislative intent and binding nature of CBDT Circular.Analysis:1. Appeal against CIT(A) Orders:- Three appeals by the assessee for assessment years 2006-07, 2008-09, and 2009-10 were directed against the orders of the CIT(A) and were being disposed of with a consolidated order.2. Addition of Expenses for FBT:- The primary issue in all three appeals was the addition made on account of Fringe Benefit Tax (FBT) for expenses not incurred for the employees of the assessee but related to non-employees and purely for business purposes.- The ITAT, Ahmedabad Bench in a previous case held that FBT could not be invoked for expenses not incurred on employees or their family members.3. Incorrect Application of Provisions:- The CIT(A) was alleged to have erred in applying section 115WB(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 incorrectly by levying FBT on expenses without a direct/indirect connection to the employees, contrary to the legislative intent.4. Applicability of FBT on Non-Employee Expenses:- The Tribunal found that there was no clear finding by the AO or CIT(A) on whether the expenses were related to non-employees and for the business purpose of the assessee.- The issue was restored to the AO for a fresh decision in accordance with law and after considering the decisions of the ITAT, Ahmedabad Bench in a similar case.5. Legislative Intent and CBDT Circular:- The decision emphasized the need for a clear finding on the nature of expenses in relation to non-employees and the business purpose of the assessee.- Any decision by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in a pending writ petition would be binding on the authorities.6. Final Decision:- All appeals of the assessee were allowed for statistical purposes, with the direction to the AO to reconsider the issue in light of the Tribunal's decision and to provide a clear finding on the nature of the expenses in question.This detailed analysis highlights the key issues involved in the judgment, focusing on the interpretation of FBT provisions, the correct application of the law, and the need for a clear determination of the nature of expenses in relation to employees and non-employees.