2014 (2) TMI 1331 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal decisions on revenue and assessee appeals, ALP computation, disallowance, interest-free advances, interest expenditure, and capital work in progress.

Ion Exchange (I) Ltd., Versus The Addl. CIT 6 (1) Aaykar Bhavan, MK Road, Mumbai and vice-versa

The Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal and partly allowed the assessee's appeal for statistical purposes, restoring several issues to the AO for ... Disallowance on account of notional interest on these loans - Held that:- From the order of AO and Ld. CIT(A) we have found that it was the contention of assessee that it did not incur interest expenditure for the purpose of making investment out of which the assessee has earned tax free income. Such contention has not been examined by either of them. Therefore, to the extent it relates to disallowance of interest we consider it just and proper to restore this issue to the file of AO with direction to re-examine the disallowance to that extent. So far as it relates to another component which relates to other expenses, we uphold the same. Accordingly, Ground No.2 is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Addition u/s 36(1)(iii) - interest paid for expansion of existing business has to be to be disallowed - Held that:- Since we are restoring other issues to the file of AO, therefore, in the interest of justice this issue is also restored back to the file of AO for re-adjudication with a direction to give appropriate opportunity to the assessee to bring all facts on records. After bringing all facts on record, this issue will be re-adjudicated by the AO as per law. This ground is treated to be allowed for statistical purposes. Issues Involved:1. Addition on account of imputed interest on loans/advances to Foreign AEs.2. Disallowance under section 14A.3. Disallowance of interest-free advances to subsidiary companies / Disallowance of interest expenditure on investment for controlling interest.4. Addition on account of interest on borrowed capital towards Capital Work in Progress.5. General error in the date of Notice of Demand.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Addition on Account of Imputed Interest on Loans/Advances to Foreign AEs:The assessee lent various amounts to its AEs, and the TPO computed the ALP at Rs. 28,47,041/- by taking an interest rate of 17.26%. The Ld. CIT(A) directed the AO to adopt the LIBOR rate as per RBI's Master Circular No.02/2007-08, resulting in a benchmark of six months LIBOR + 150 basis points for loans with an average maturity period of three to five years and six months LIBOR + 250 basis points for loans exceeding five years. The Tribunal upheld the Ld. CIT(A)'s direction, dismissing the appeals of both the assessee and the department.2. Disallowance Under Section 14A:The AO computed the disallowance under Rule 8D at Rs. 4,08,412/- for a dividend income of Rs. 9,00,459/-. The assessee argued that it had sufficient own funds for investments and did not incur any expenditure to earn the tax-free income. The Tribunal restored the issue to the AO to re-examine the disallowance of interest, while upholding the disallowance of other expenses.3. Disallowance of Interest-Free Advances to Subsidiary Companies / Interest Expenditure on Investment for Controlling Interest:The Tribunal restored the issue to the AO for fresh adjudication, following the precedent set in the assessee's own case for earlier years (A.Y. 2005-06 and 2007-08). The AO is to consider the commercial expediency of the transactions in light of the Supreme Court decision in S.A. Builders Ltd. v. CIT (2007) 288 ITR 1 (SC).4. Addition on Account of Interest on Borrowed Capital Towards Capital Work in Progress:The AO disallowed Rs. 39,024/- towards interest paid on borrowed funds for expansion of the Resin Manufacturing undertaking at Ankelshwar. The Tribunal restored the issue to the AO to examine the assessee's contention that the interest relating to borrowed capital was considered in the work-in-progress.5. General Error in the Date of Notice of Demand:The Ld. CIT(A) held that the mistake in the date of the Notice of Demand was a clerical/typographical error and did not render the assessment order or the demand notice erroneous or invalid.Conclusion:The Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal and partly allowed the assessee's appeal for statistical purposes, restoring several issues to the AO for re-adjudication. The Tribunal upheld the directions of the Ld. CIT(A) regarding the adoption of the LIBOR rate as per RBI's Master Circular for computing the ALP of loans to AEs. The disallowance under section 14A was partly upheld and partly restored to the AO for re-examination. The issues regarding interest-free advances to subsidiary companies and interest expenditure on investment for controlling interest were also restored to the AO for fresh adjudication. The addition on account of interest on borrowed capital towards Capital Work in Progress was restored to the AO for re-adjudication. The general error in the date of the Notice of Demand was deemed clerical and not affecting the validity of the assessment order.