Tribunal allows assessee's appeal on prior period expenditure, disallowance, depreciation, dismissing department's appeal.

The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal concerning prior period expenditure and disallowance under Section 14A, and upheld the CIT(A)'s decision on the allowance of depreciation on computer software. The department's appeal was dismissed.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Prior period expenditure adjustment.
2. Disallowance under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act.
3. Depreciation on intangible assets (computer software).

Detailed Analysis:

1. Prior Period Expenditure Adjustment:
The primary issue in both the appeals was the adjustment of prior period expenditure amounting to Rs. 2,33,22,600/-. The assessee, a public sector enterprise engaged in insuring credit risk, had declared an income of Rs. 438,04,88,996/- for the assessment year 2009-10. During the assessment, the AO noted that the assessee included Rs. 25,08,640/- to the total income on account of prior period adjustment. The AO found that the assessee had shown total prior period expenses of Rs. 2,58,31,240/- and after adjusting prior period income of Rs. 2,33,22,600/-, debited Rs. 25,08,640/- to the profit and loss account. The AO disallowed the prior period expenses of Rs. 2,33,22,600/- as they were not relatable to the impugned assessment year. The CIT(A), however, directed the AO to delete the addition subject to verification that the prior period income was offered to tax in earlier years. The Tribunal found that the assessee had not claimed the prior period expenditure in its profit & loss account and had consistently followed the same accounting method in earlier years, which was accepted by the AO. Therefore, the Tribunal directed the deletion of the disallowance, allowing the assessee’s appeal and dismissing the department’s appeal.

2. Disallowance under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act:
The second issue was the disallowance of Rs. 55,05,796/- under Section 14A. The AO noticed that the assessee earned exempt income by way of dividend amounting to Rs. 4,91,63,414/- and made a suo motu disallowance of Rs. 32,16,629/-. The AO, however, computed the disallowance under Rule 8D at Rs. 55,05,796/-. The CIT(A) confirmed this addition. The Tribunal referred to its decision in the assessee’s own case for A.Y. 2007-08 and the case of ICICI Prudential Insurance Company Ltd., where it was held that Section 14A does not apply to insurance companies due to the overriding provisions of Section 44. Following these precedents, the Tribunal held that no disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D can be made in the case of the assessee, thus allowing the assessee’s appeal on this ground.

3. Depreciation on Intangible Assets (Computer Software):
The final issue was regarding the allowance of depreciation on computer software amounting to Rs. 1,88,51,231/-. The AO disallowed the claim on the basis that the payments for the software were due in subsequent years and were in the nature of license fees payable annually. The CIT(A) allowed the claim after finding that the software had been installed in the assessee’s computers. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)’s decision, noting that the deferral of payment does not invalidate the claim for depreciation once the asset is acquired and used for business purposes. The Tribunal found no infirmity in the CIT(A)’s order and dismissed the department’s appeal on this ground.

Conclusion:
In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the assessee’s appeal regarding prior period expenditure and disallowance under Section 14A, and upheld the CIT(A)’s decision on the allowance of depreciation on computer software, thereby dismissing the department’s appeal. The order was pronounced in the open court on 12th May 2017.

---