Interest income linked to project setup deemed capital receipt, reducing project costs.

The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision that interest income from deposits with a group company should reduce project development expenditure, as it was linked to the project setup. The Tribunal rejected the Revenue's appeal, directing the AO to delete the addition of interest income from fixed deposits, treating it as a capital receipt. Consequently, both fixed deposit interest income and group company deposit interest income were deemed capital receipts, reducing project costs. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed, and the assessee's cross objection was allowed.

---

---

Issues involved:

1. Deletion of addition made by the AO on account of interest income under Section 56 of the Income Tax Act.
2. Classification of interest income from fixed deposits and its eligibility for set off against project development expenditure.
3. Classification of interest income from deposits with a group company and its eligibility for set off against project development expenditure.

Issue-wise detailed analysis:

1. Deletion of addition made by the AO on account of interest income under Section 56 of the Income Tax Act:

The AO observed that the assessee had earned interest income from temporary deposits and fixed deposits, which were not linked to the setting up of the power plant and thus, classified them as revenue income under Section 56. The CIT(A) revisited the facts and found merit in the assessee's plea for adjustment of interest income from deposits with Adani Welspun Exploration Ltd. (AWEL) against the project development expenditure, but not for interest income from fixed deposits with banks.

2. Classification of interest income from fixed deposits and its eligibility for set off against project development expenditure:

The CIT(A) held that the interest income of Rs. 47,04,267 earned from fixed deposits with Axis Bank and SBI could not be demonstrated by the assessee to be inextricably linked with the setting up of the power plant. Therefore, this interest income was correctly assessed as income from other sources by the AO. The assessee's argument that the funds were temporarily parked pending utilization for the power plant construction was not accepted as sufficient proof of linkage to the project setup.

3. Classification of interest income from deposits with a group company and its eligibility for set off against project development expenditure:

The CIT(A) found that the interest income of Rs. 4,57,53,424 earned from deposits with AWEL was inextricably linked with the construction of the power plant. The funds received from Adani Power Ltd. were temporarily placed with AWEL and later utilized for the power plant project. The CIT(A) relied on the Delhi High Court decision in NTPC Sail Power Company Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT and the Supreme Court decisions in Bokaro Steel Ltd., Karnataka Power Corporation, and Bongaigaon Refinery & Petrochemicals Ltd., which held that interest earned on funds linked to the project setup should be treated as capital receipts and not revenue income.

Tribunal's Analysis:

The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision regarding the interest income from deposits with AWEL, agreeing that it should reduce the project development expenditure. The Tribunal emphasized that both interest expenditure and income were inextricably linked to the project setup and should be treated consistently. The Tribunal rejected the Revenue's appeal and allowed the assessee's cross objection, directing the AO to delete the addition of interest income from fixed deposits, thereby treating it as capital receipt and reducing it from the project costs.

Conclusion:

The Tribunal concluded that the interest income from both fixed deposits and deposits with AWEL should be treated as capital receipts linked to the project setup, thereby reducing the project development expenditure. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed, and the assessee's cross objection was allowed.

---