TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal allows write-off of business advances, remands APGENCO issue, upholds section 80IB claim.</h1> <h3>M/s Visaka Industries Ltd. Versus Addl. Commissioner of Income-tax, Range – 3 And Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle – 3 (3), Hyderabad</h3> M/s Visaka Industries Ltd. Versus Addl. Commissioner of Income-tax, Range – 3 And Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle – 3 (3), Hyderabad - TMI Issues Involved:1. Disallowance of provision/write-off of advances.2. Disallowance of bad debts.3. Disallowance of claim under section 80IB.4. Disallowance of expenditure incurred towards payment to APGENCO.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Disallowance of Provision/Write-off of Advances:The assessee claimed a write-off of advances totaling Rs. 4,49,45,842, which included amounts paid for land acquisition and machinery purchase for business expansion. The Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed these claims, considering them capital in nature and not incurred during the year. The CIT(A) sustained the disallowance of Rs. 2,26,16,000 and Rs. 1,64,00,000 related to advances for land and machinery, respectively, but allowed the amounts paid to APGENCO for fly ash supply. The Tribunal analyzed the case law and concluded that the advances for business expansion fall within the ambit of section 37 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as they were incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business. Therefore, the Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal on this ground.2. Disallowance of Bad Debts:The assessee did not press the ground related to the disallowance of bad debts amounting to Rs. 66,84,484. Consequently, the CIT(A) dismissed this ground as not pressed.3. Disallowance of Claim under Section 80IB:The CIT(A) allowed the assessee's claim of Rs. 5,48,659 under section 80IB. The Tribunal did not find any contention from the revenue on this issue, and thus, the CIT(A)'s decision to allow the claim was upheld.4. Disallowance of Expenditure Incurred towards Payment to APGENCO:The AO disallowed the expenditure of Rs. 59.25 lakhs paid to APGENCO for upgradation, operation, and maintenance of the fly ash extraction system, considering it capital in nature and not incurred during the relevant year. The CIT(A), however, allowed the claim, stating that the investment was for obtaining raw material at a concessional rate, thus qualifying as revenue expenditure. The Tribunal remanded this issue to the AO for verification of whether the assessee procured fly ash at a concessional rate. If verified, the AO was directed to allow the claim; otherwise, the addition would be sustained.Conclusion:The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal regarding the write-off of advances for business expansion and remanded the issue of expenditure towards APGENCO back to the AO for verification. The appeal of the revenue was allowed for statistical purposes, and the assessee's claim under section 80IB was upheld. The disallowance of bad debts was dismissed as not pressed.
TaxTMI 