Tribunal decision: Assessee's appeals partly allowed, disallowances overturned, contributions upheld, and Revenue's appeal dismissed.

The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeals for AY 2005-06 and AY 2006-07 in part, with disallowances on feasibility study expenditure, education cess expenses, and commission payments being overturned. The disallowance under Section 14A was reduced significantly. The Tribunal upheld the contributions to institutions at Jamshedpur and Collieries, and remanded the claim for depreciation on Gopalpur project assets for further assessment. The Revenue's appeal for AY 2005-06 was dismissed.

---

---

Issues Involved:

1. Disallowance of expenditure incurred on feasibility study.
2. Disallowance of expenses on account of education cess.
3. Disallowance under section 14A of the Act.
4. Disallowance of commission paid to selling agents for effecting sales to Government parties.
5. Contribution to institutions at Jamshedpur and Collieries.
6. Claim of depreciation on Gopalpur project assets.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Disallowance of Expenditure Incurred on Feasibility Study:

The assessee claimed Rs. 5,04,60,373/- as revenue expenditure for feasibility studies related to its manufacturing activities. The AO treated it as capital expenditure, granting 25% depreciation. The CIT(A) upheld this, noting the expenses were for a new project not yet started. However, the Tribunal found the studies were for identifying minerals for existing business development, not initiating new business. The Tribunal cited past decisions favoring the assessee, including a High Court ruling for AY 1985-86, and allowed the expenditure as revenue expenditure.

2. Disallowance of Expenses on Account of Education Cess:

The Tribunal found this issue covered by the Rajasthan High Court decision in Chambal Fertilisers and Chemicals Ltd. & Anr. vs. JCIT, which held that education cess is not disallowable under section 40(a)(ii) of the Act. The Tribunal directed the AO to grant the deduction on account of education cess.

3. Disallowance Under Section 14A of the Act:

The assessee earned Rs. 111,39,52,672/- in dividends, claiming no expenditure for earning this exempt income. The AO applied Rule 8D(2), disallowing Rs. 40.50 crores. The CIT(A) directed the AO to re-compute disallowance using a formula from AY 2007-08. The Tribunal noted Supreme Court rulings that Rule 8D(2) applies from AY 2008-09 and found the assessee had sufficient own funds, negating interest disallowance. It directed disallowance of only 1% of the exempt income for administrative expenses.

4. Disallowance of Commission Paid to Selling Agents:

The AO disallowed Rs. 2,33,28,385/- in commissions, questioning the services rendered by agents. The CIT(A) directed the assessee to produce confirmations from agents. The Tribunal found the assessee provided confirmations and invoices detailing services rendered, subject to service tax and TDS. The Tribunal noted similar commissions were allowed in subsequent years and remanded the issue to the AO for de novo adjudication.

5. Contribution to Institutions at Jamshedpur and Collieries:

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, citing consistent Tribunal decisions and a High Court ruling for AY 1985-86, which found the expenses were for business expediency to motivate the workforce.

6. Claim of Depreciation on Gopalpur Project Assets:

The assessee raised an additional ground for depreciation on Gopalpur project assets, citing a Tribunal decision for AY 1997-98 accepted by the Revenue. The Tribunal admitted the ground, remanding it to the AO for de novo adjudication, noting the issue arises from AY 1997-98 onwards.

Conclusion:

- Assessee’s appeals for AY 2005-06 and AY 2006-07 were partly allowed for statistical purposes.
- Revenue’s appeal for AY 2005-06 was dismissed.

---