2015 (1) TMI 1461 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal Rulings on Project Expenses and Disallowances

The DCIT, Circle-4, Ahmedabad Versus Gujarat Mineral Development Corporation Ltd. And Vice-Versa And The ACIT, Circle-4 Versus Gujarat Mineral Development Corporation Ltd.

The DCIT, Circle-4, Ahmedabad Versus Gujarat Mineral Development Corporation Ltd. And Vice-Versa And The ACIT, Circle-4 Versus Gujarat Mineral Development ... Issues Involved:1. Disallowance of depreciation on Multi Metal Project.2. Disallowance of prior period expenses.3. Taxation of lease rentals.4. Disallowance under Section 14A.5. Disallowance of expenditure on Mata-no-Madh Project.6. Disallowance of expenditure on Akri Mota Power Project.7. Disallowance of depreciation on assets used in projects.8. Disallowance of salary to staff at the residence of Chairman.9. Addition of miscellaneous income.10. Disallowance of employees' contribution to PF paid after the due date.Detailed Analysis:1. Disallowance of Depreciation on Multi Metal Project:The Revenue's appeal contested the deletion of a Rs. 5,00,000 disallowance for depreciation on the Multi Metal Project. The CIT(A) had deleted this disallowance based on prior years' decisions. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, noting that similar disallowances were previously deleted for the assessment years 1997-98 to 2000-01, and no new contrary facts were presented.2. Disallowance of Prior Period Expenses:The Revenue appealed against the deletion of Rs. 18,76,968 in prior period expenses, while the assessee contested the confirmation of Rs. 58,22,018. The Tribunal restored the issue to the Assessing Officer (AO) for re-examination, directing the AO to determine if the expenses crystallized in the relevant year, following the precedent set in ITA No. 402/Ahd/2005 for A.Y. 2001-02.3. Taxation of Lease Rentals:The Revenue contested the CIT(A)'s direction to tax only the interest portion of lease rentals from GSRTC, disallowing depreciation of Rs. 2,00,34,358. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, referencing the Special Bench decision in IndusInd Bank Ltd., which established that only the interest component of lease rentals should be taxed in financial lease transactions.4. Disallowance under Section 14A:The Revenue's appeal involved a disallowance of Rs. 58,68,355 under Section 14A, while the assessee contested a disallowance of Rs. 2,15,024. The Tribunal found that the AO failed to establish a nexus between interest-bearing funds and the investments made. It cited judicial precedents indicating that if interest-free funds are available, no disallowance should be made. The Tribunal upheld the deletion of Rs. 58,68,385 and directed the AO to delete the disallowance of Rs. 2,15,024.5. Disallowance of Expenditure on Mata-no-Madh Project:The assessee's appeal contested the disallowance of Rs. 99,62,450 for the Mata-no-Madh Project. The Tribunal noted that similar expenses were allowed in earlier years and directed the AO to delete the disallowance, citing consistent decisions in the assessee's favor for previous years.6. Disallowance of Expenditure on Akri Mota Power Project:The assessee's appeal contested the disallowance of Rs. 55,89,17,419 for the Akri Mota Power Project, including interest and financial charges. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, noting that the project represented a new line of business distinct from the assessee's existing operations, consistent with decisions in earlier years.7. Disallowance of Depreciation on Assets Used in Projects:The assessee contested disallowances of depreciation on assets used in the Mata-no-Madh and Akri Mota projects. The Tribunal directed the AO to allow depreciation for Mata-no-Madh, following earlier decisions. For Akri Mota, the Tribunal restored the issue to the AO for verification, as the depreciation claim was disputed.8. Disallowance of Salary to Staff at the Residence of Chairman:The assessee contested the disallowance of Rs. 2,06,516 for salary to staff at the Chairman's residence. The Tribunal deleted the disallowance, noting that similar expenses were allowed in earlier years and that such expenses were not prohibited by law.9. Addition of Miscellaneous Income:The assessee contested the addition of miscellaneous income, arguing it should be set off against project expenses. The Tribunal restored the issue to the AO to determine if the income was directly connected to the construction of the plant, following precedents set by the Supreme Court.10. Disallowance of Employees' Contribution to PF Paid After Due Date:The assessee contested the disallowance of Rs. 1,11,06,377 for PF contributions paid after the due date but before filing the return. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, referencing the Gujarat High Court's ruling in CIT v. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation, which disallowed such contributions.Conclusion:The Tribunal's judgment involves a detailed examination of multiple disallowances and claims, with decisions largely based on precedents and consistent treatment of similar issues in previous years. The Tribunal upheld some disallowances, restored others for re-examination, and directed the deletion of several disallowances, ensuring that the principles of consistency and judicial precedents were adhered to.