2019 (1) TMI 2043 - AT - Income Tax

Storage tank operations qualify for Section 80IA deduction as infrastructure facilities within port premises

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Gandhidham Circle, Gandhidham-Kutch Versus Rishi Kiran Logistics Pvt. Ltd And Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Gandhidham Range, Gandhidham (VICE-VERSA)

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Gandhidham Circle, Gandhidham-Kutch Versus Rishi Kiran Logistics Pvt. Ltd And Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, ... Issues Involved:1. Disallowance of deduction under section 80IA(4)(i) on storage tanks.2. Addition under section 14A for disallowance of expenses related to exempt income.3. Addition under section 40A(2)(a) for Terminal Handling & Storage Charges.4. Disallowance of depreciation on land and windmill-related expenses.5. Disallowance of share issue expenses under section 35D.6. Addition under section 41(2) for outstanding amounts.7. Disallowance of staff welfare and traveling expenses.8. Disallowance of interest expenses under section 14A.9. Delay in filing cross objections.Detailed Analysis:1. Disallowance of Deduction under Section 80IA(4)(i) on Storage Tanks:- AO's Allegation: The storage tanks lacked loading and unloading facilities and were not within the Kandla Port Trust premises, thus not qualifying as an enterprise under section 80IA(4).- Assessee's Defense: The storage tanks were dedicated to specific chemical storage with necessary facilities as per agreement with Dow Chemical International Pvt. Ltd., and were part of port operations.- Tribunal's Decision: The storage tanks are integral to port operations and qualify for deduction under section 80IA(4)(i). The AO's observations were incorrect, and the assessee is entitled to the deduction of Rs. 2,25,43,715/-.2. Addition under Section 14A for Disallowance of Expenses Related to Exempt Income:- AO's Allegation: Disallowed Rs. 30,94,549/- under section 14A, alleging the assessee failed to prove the investment was made from its own funds.- Assessee's Defense: The investment was strategic in nature, made in a subsidiary to gain control, not to earn exempt income. The assessee had substantial interest-free funds.- Tribunal's Decision: The disallowance under section 14A was not justified as the investment was strategic and not for earning exempt income. However, a disallowance of Rs. 2,23,639/- under Rule 8D(iii) was confirmed due to associated bank charges and clerical work.3. Addition under Section 40A(2)(a) for Terminal Handling & Storage Charges:- AO's Allegation: The assessee paid excessive charges to a related party, SPIPL, at rates higher than the fair market value.- Assessee's Defense: Payments to SPIPL were at the same rate as to third parties, and not excessive.- Tribunal's Decision: The payments were not excessive when compared to market rates and payments to unrelated third parties. The addition was rightly deleted by the CIT(A).4. Disallowance of Depreciation on Land and Windmill-Related Expenses:- AO's Allegation: Disallowed depreciation on the grounds that the expenses were not essential for the functioning of the windmill.- Assessee's Defense: Specialized foundations and electrical fittings are integral to the windmill's operation.- Tribunal's Decision: Following the Gujarat High Court's judgment, the entire windmill assembly, including civil and electrical works, qualifies for depreciation. The addition was rightly deleted by the CIT(A).5. Disallowance of Share Issue Expenses under Section 35D:- AO's Allegation: Disallowed Rs. 2,61,000/- for share issue expenses, stating they were not related to public issue or expansion.- Assessee's Defense: The expenses were incurred before the commencement of business and were capital in nature.- Tribunal's Decision: The expenses were for business purposes and allowable. The addition was rightly deleted by the CIT(A).6. Addition under Section 41(2) for Outstanding Amounts:- AO's Allegation: Added Rs. 10,07,333/- for long-outstanding amounts from various parties.- Assessee's Defense: No substantial defense provided.- Tribunal's Decision: The addition was upheld as the assessee could not explain the outstanding amounts.7. Disallowance of Staff Welfare and Traveling Expenses:- AO's Allegation: Disallowed Rs. 50,096/- for staff welfare and Rs. 20,208/- for traveling expenses due to personal elements.- Assessee's Defense: No substantial defense provided.- Tribunal's Decision: The disallowance was upheld as the assessee failed to provide details.8. Disallowance of Interest Expenses under Section 14A:- AO's Allegation: Disallowed Rs. 30,04,841/- under section 14A.- Tribunal's Decision: Following the decision in connected appeals, the disallowance was deleted.9. Delay in Filing Cross Objections:- Assessee's Issue: Filed cross objections with a delay of 494 days without a cogent reason.- Tribunal's Decision: The cross objections were dismissed due to the delay.Conclusion:The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decisions in most instances, granting relief to the assessee on several grounds related to deductions and disallowances, while confirming some disallowances where the assessee failed to provide adequate explanations. The cross objections filed by the assessee were dismissed due to delay.