2016 (6) TMI 1391 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal remands tax issues for re-examination, upholds decisions on guarantee fees & gratuity provision

Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd. Versus ACIT And DCIT, Circle-1 (1), Baroda Versus Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd.,

Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd. Versus ACIT And DCIT, Circle-1 (1), Baroda Versus Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd., - TMI Issues Involved:1. Disallowance under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act.2. Enhancement of Book Profit under Section 115JB due to disallowance under Section 14A.3. Disallowance of depreciation on certain assets.4. Disallowance of guarantee fees.5. Addition of provision for gratuity to book profit under Section 115JB.Detailed Analysis:1. Disallowance under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act:The primary issue revolves around the disallowance made under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act, which pertains to expenditure incurred in relation to income not includible in total income, specifically exempt dividend income. The Assessing Officer (AO) observed that the assessee had earned exempt income of Rs. 2,48,67,198/- but did not show any expenditure incurred to earn this income. The AO applied Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, resulting in a disallowance of Rs. 152.46 crores. The CIT(A) reduced this disallowance to Rs. 61.46 crores. Both the assessee and the Revenue appealed against this decision.The Tribunal noted that similar disallowances had been made in previous years (2006-07 and 2007-08) and had been remanded back to the AO for fresh adjudication. The Tribunal directed the AO to re-examine the facts and figures, considering the assessee's submissions about the nature of its investments and the sources of funds. The AO was instructed to ensure that the disallowance under Section 14A does not exceed the exempt income earned during the year.2. Enhancement of Book Profit under Section 115JB due to disallowance under Section 14A:This issue is incidental to the first. The enhancement of book profit under Section 115JB was due to the disallowance under Section 14A. Since the Tribunal remanded the Section 14A disallowance back to the AO for re-examination, it also directed the AO to recompute the book profit under Section 115JB based on the revised disallowance, if any.3. Disallowance of depreciation on certain assets:The AO disallowed depreciation of Rs. 9,17,49,861/- claimed by the assessee on certain items classified under the block of computers. The assessee initially agreed to the disallowance but later contested it before the CIT(A), arguing that some items should qualify for higher depreciation rates. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's decision, noting that the disputed items were not computers or computer software and thus did not qualify for 60% depreciation.The Tribunal remanded this issue back to the AO for re-examination, allowing the assessee to provide necessary details to determine the correct amount of depreciation on computers.4. Disallowance of guarantee fees:The AO treated the guarantee fees of Rs. 4.76 crores paid to the Government of Gujarat as capital expenditure, arguing that it provided an enduring benefit. The CIT(A) reversed this decision, treating the guarantee fees as revenue expenditure based on the Supreme Court's decision in India Cements Ltd. (60 ITR 52). The CIT(A) noted that the guarantee fees were an annual recurring expenditure and did not result in an enduring benefit.The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, citing a similar case (Gujarat Energy Transmission Corpn. Ltd. vs. ACIT) where the guarantee fees were treated as revenue expenditure.5. Addition of provision for gratuity to book profit under Section 115JB:The AO added a provision for gratuity of Rs. 44.36 lakhs to the book profit, considering it an unascertained liability. The CIT(A) deleted this addition, following a precedent in the assessee's own case for previous years, where it was held that provisions for gratuity based on actuarial valuation are not unascertained liabilities.The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, referencing the same precedent and confirming that the provision for gratuity based on actuarial valuation is not an unascertained liability.Conclusion:The Tribunal remanded the disallowance under Section 14A and the related enhancement of book profit under Section 115JB back to the AO for re-examination. It also remanded the issue of depreciation on certain assets back to the AO. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decisions on the disallowance of guarantee fees and the addition of provision for gratuity to book profit under Section 115JB. Both the assessee’s and the Revenue’s appeals were partly allowed for statistical purposes.