2019 (12) TMI 404 - AT - Income Tax

Appeals for Tax Years 2011-12 & 2012-13 Remanded for Fresh Consideration under Sections 80IA & 14A

GVPR Engineers Limited, HYDERABAD Versus Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, CC-5, [Now ACIT-2 (2) ] HYDERABAD, Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2 (2), HYDERABAD And The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2 (2), HYDERABAD Versus M/s. GVPR Engineers Limited, HYDERABAD

The Tribunal allowed the appeals for AYs 2011-12 and 2012-13, remanding the issues of deductions under section 80IA(4)(iv)(b) and disallowance under ... Deduction u/s 80IA(4)(i)(c) in respect of civil works including irrigation Projects and 80IA(4)(iv)(b) in respect of Electrical Projects - HELD THAT:- Relying on the decision of Hon'ble ITAT vide [2012 (4) TMI 149 - ITAT HYDERABAD] assessee submitted that all these issues have to be remanded to the file of CIT(A) for passing an order in compliance with the said order of the Tribunal. Referring to above note, Ld.Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee is entitled to deduction u/s.80IA(4) in respect of both the types of the Projects. The said order of the Tribunal helps the assessee if an effect is given and the said decision is honoured by the AO. Further, referring to the allowability of deduction u/s.80IA(4)(i)(c) - assessee submitted that the ITAT already taken a view in this regard and consequently, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed - we are of the opinion that the directions should be given to the CIT(A) to go by the said order of the Tribunal. AO shall grant an opportunity of being heard. Accordingly, Ground Nos. 1 to 4 are allowed for statistical purposes. Disallowance u/s.14A - HELD THAT:- There is no dispute about the earning of the dividend income of ₹ 4.5 Lakhs. It is also a fact that the finance charges were incurred by the assessee as seen from the Profit & Loss A/c. Considering the exempt nature of the dividend income, the onus of the assessee is to demonstrate that none of the finance charges were incurred for investments, which yielded the dividend income to the assessee in the year under consideration. The orders of the AO and CIT(A) are not clear about the extent of investments made by the assessee out of the interest bearing borrowed funds. It is also not emanating from the orders about the facts on the sufficiency of non-interest free funds for explaining the dividend yielding investments. Therefore, in all fairness, we are of the opinion that this issue should also be remanded to the file of AO for fresh consideration. Hence, this ground of assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Issues Involved:1. Condonation of delay.2. Allowability of deduction under section 80IA(4)(iv)(b) for Electrical Projects.3. Disallowance under section 14A.4. Deduction under section 80IA(4)(i)(c) for civil works including irrigation projects.Detailed Analysis:1. Condonation of Delay:The Revenue filed appeals with delays of 254 days for AY 2011-12 and 179 days for AY 2012-13. Separate affidavits seeking condonation of delay were submitted. The Tribunal, being satisfied with the reasonable cause for the delay, condoned the delay and admitted the appeals for hearing on merits.2. Allowability of Deduction under Section 80IA(4)(iv)(b) for Electrical Projects:The assessee claimed deductions under section 80IA(4)(iv)(b) for Electrical Projects, which were disallowed by the AO. The CIT(A) upheld the disallowance, referencing previous ITAT decisions for AY 2010-11, which denied such deductions. The CIT(A) and ITAT observed that the projects did not qualify as power transmission or distribution undertakings, thus not eligible for the deduction. The Tribunal noted that the proviso to section 80IA(4)(iv)(b) specifies that the deduction is for profits derived from laying new lines for transmission or distribution, implying a different undertaking from the one involved in transmission and distribution. The Tribunal remanded the issue to the CIT(A) for compliance with the Tribunal's earlier order, directing the AO to grant deductions for eligible projects involving design, development, and financial involvement.3. Disallowance under Section 14A:The AO disallowed Rs. 2,57,955 under section 14A, citing financial charges of Rs. 12.63 Crores and the earning of Rs. 4.5 Lakhs in exempt dividend income. The CIT(A) upheld the disallowance, noting the assessee's failure to rebut the AO's conclusion that interest-bearing funds were used for earning exempt income. The Tribunal found the orders lacking clarity on the extent of investments from interest-bearing funds and non-interest free funds. Consequently, the Tribunal remanded the issue to the AO for fresh consideration, directing the assessee to demonstrate that finance charges were not incurred for investments yielding exempt income.4. Deduction under Section 80IA(4)(i)(c) for Civil Works Including Irrigation Projects:The CIT(A) allowed deductions under section 80IA(4)(i)(c) for civil works, following ITAT orders for AY 2004-05 to 2009-10, which held that projects involving design, development, and financial involvement are eligible for deductions. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, consistent with its earlier rulings, and dismissed the Revenue's appeals on this issue.Conclusion:The Tribunal remanded the issues of deductions under section 80IA(4)(iv)(b) and disallowance under section 14A to the AO for fresh consideration and compliance with previous Tribunal orders. The appeals of both the assessee and the Revenue for AYs 2011-12 and 2012-13 were treated as allowed for statistical purposes. The Tribunal directed the AO to pass orders in compliance with the Tribunal's earlier decisions, ensuring proper examination of facts and eligibility for deductions.