2020 (4) TMI 323 - AT - Income Tax

Appeal Dismissed Due to Monetary Limits, Assessee's Appeal Allowed: Business Expenses Deducted

The Income tax Officer Ward 17 (3) New Delhi Versus Nahar Retail Trading Services Pvt. Ltd., [Previuolsy known as Nahar Theatres Pvt Ltd], New Delhi And (Vice-Versa)

The revenue's appeal (ITA No. 3158/DEL/2016) was dismissed as the monetary limits for filing appeals were enhanced by CBDT Circular No. 17/2019, and the ... Addition u/s 24(b) - Claim of expenditure to run the company from rental income - why expenditure may not be disallowed since there is no business activity? - HELD THAT:- A body corporate has to incur certain expenditure mandatory to maintain its corporate structure. A perusal of the expenses mentioned hereinabove clearly show that all the expenses have been incurred for maintaining corporate structure of the assessee. In our considered view, such expenditure has to be allowed while computing the income of the assessee. Our this view is fortified by the decision of the co-ordinate bench in the case of Mokul Finance Pvt Ltd [2007 (7) TMI 351 - ITAT DELHI-I] In the case in hand, the assessee has itself assessed rental income under the head “Income from house property’. Therefore, the decision relied upon by the Assessing Officer/DR would do no good to the revenue - we direct the Assessing Officer to delete the addition - Decided in favour of assessee. Issues Involved:1. Deletion of addition made by the Assessing Officer under Section 24(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.2. Confirmation of disallowance of business expenses under Section 24(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Deletion of Addition Made by the Assessing Officer Under Section 24(b):The revenue's appeal (ITA No. 3158/DEL/2016) contested the deletion of an addition of Rs. 55,86,303/- by the CIT(A). The Assessing Officer had made this addition under Section 24(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. However, the tribunal noted that the appeal should be dismissed in light of CBDT Circular No. 17/2019 dated 08.08.2019, which enhanced the monetary limits for filing appeals by the department. The tribunal clarified that this circular applies retrospectively to pending appeals as well. Consequently, since the tax effect in the revenue's appeal was below the enhanced monetary limit specified in the circular, the appeal was dismissed.2. Confirmation of Disallowance of Business Expenses Under Section 24(b):The assessee's appeal (ITA No. 2283/DEL/2016) challenged the CIT(A)'s decision to confirm the disallowance of business expenses amounting to Rs. 16,16,065/-. The Assessing Officer had disallowed these expenses on the grounds that the assessee did not carry out any business activity during the assessment year and had only returned income from rent. The expenses included professional and legal charges and general expenses, which the assessee claimed were necessary for maintaining its corporate structure.The tribunal analyzed the nature of the expenses and concluded that they were indeed incurred for maintaining the corporate structure of the assessee. It referred to the decision of the co-ordinate bench in the case of Mokul Finance Pvt Ltd, which allowed similar expenses for maintaining a corporate structure even when no business activity was carried out. The tribunal held that such expenses are allowable while computing the income of the assessee and directed the Assessing Officer to delete the disallowance of Rs. 16,16,065/-.The tribunal also noted that the decisions relied upon by the Assessing Officer were not applicable as they pertained to the assessment of rental income under the head 'Income from house property', which was not disputed by the assessee.Conclusion:The appeal by the revenue (ITA No. 3158/DEL/2016) was dismissed due to the applicability of CBDT Circular No. 17/2019, which enhanced the monetary limits for filing appeals. The appeal by the assessee (ITA No. 2283/DEL/2016) was allowed, and the disallowance of business expenses was deleted, recognizing the necessity of such expenses for maintaining the corporate structure. The order was pronounced in the open court on 29.01.2020.