Vessel acquisition loan evidence prevented separate taxation of FEFG under the tonnage tax scheme where earlier order applied

A factual finding that the loan was used to acquire the vessel, when supported by documentary evidence and not shown to be perverse, did not give rise to a substantial question of law under Section 43A. The component of FEFG already covered by an earlier order could not be subjected to separate taxation under the tonnage tax scheme. On both issues, the matter was decided against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee, and the challenge failed in full.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the amount of FEFG of Rs. 7.53 crores was taxable under Section 43A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 when the loan was utilized for acquisition of the vessel. (ii) Whether the amount of FEFG of Rs. 23.11 lakhs could be separately taxed despite the income having been offered under the tonnage tax scheme.

Issue (i): Whether the amount of FEFG of Rs. 7.53 crores was taxable under Section 43A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 when the loan was utilized for acquisition of the vessel.

Analysis: The Tribunal's finding was that the assessee had utilized the loan for purchase of the vessel Bulk Prosperity. The agreement and the Commissioner's own finding supported the conclusion that the assessee had acquired the vessel. On that basis, the finding was held to be supported by documentary evidence and not perverse.

Conclusion: The issue was decided against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether the amount of FEFG of Rs. 23.11 lakhs could be separately taxed despite the income having been offered under the tonnage tax scheme.

Analysis: The Court accepted the submission that this component was already covered by an earlier order of the Court. In view of that earlier , no separate taxation of the amount was warranted.

Conclusion: The issue was decided against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: No substantial question of law arose, and the appeal failed in entirety.

Ratio Decidendi: A factual finding that a loan was utilized for acquisition of the relevant vessel, when supported by documentary evidence and not shown to be perverse, does not give rise to a substantial question of law; a component already covered by an earlier binding order cannot be separately taxed again.

---