Tribunal upholds CIT(A)'s orders, dismisses appeals on disallowance adjustments.

The Tribunal dismissed both appeals, upholding the CIT(A)'s orders. It confirmed the disallowance adjustments under Section 14A read with Rule 8D, while allowing the deduction for provision for future loss on derivatives due to foreign exchange fluctuation.

---

---

Issues Involved:

1. Disallowance under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 read with Rule 8D of Income Tax Rules, 1962.
2. Deduction on account of provision for future loss on derivatives due to foreign exchange fluctuation.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Disallowance under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 read with Rule 8D of Income Tax Rules, 1962:

The assessee, a company engaged in various manufacturing activities, filed its return declaring a loss and claimed exempt income from dividends under Section 10(34) of the Income Tax Act. The assessee offered a disallowance of Rs. 1.20 lakhs for expenses related to earning the exempt income. However, the Assessing Officer (AO) was not satisfied and invoked Rule 8D, calculating a disallowance of Rs. 2,80,64,837/-. The AO made a further disallowance of Rs. 2,79,44,837/- after considering the suo motu disallowance by the assessee.

The assessee challenged this disallowance before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)], who deleted the interest expenditure disallowance of Rs. 2,51,26,736/- under Rule 8D(2)(ii), citing sufficient own funds for investments. For the disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii), the CIT(A) directed the AO to re-compute based on investments that yielded exempt income.

The assessee appealed to the Tribunal, arguing that the AO erred in mechanically invoking Rule 8D without identifying defects in the assessee’s claim and partially confirming the AO's computation. The Tribunal, after hearing both sides, found the issue covered by its earlier order in the assessee’s own case for previous years. It upheld the CIT(A)’s order, dismissing the assessee’s appeal.

2. Deduction on Account of Provision for Future Loss on Derivatives Due to Foreign Exchange Fluctuation:

The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s deletion of the AO’s disallowance of Rs. 3,67,22,220/- for provision for future loss on derivatives due to foreign exchange fluctuation. The AO had disallowed this, considering it notional and not allowable as per CBDT Instruction No. 3/2010.

The CIT(A) deleted the disallowance, noting that the loss was recognized scientifically as per Accounting Standard-11 (AS-11) and was not notional. The CIT(A) cited the Supreme Court’s decisions in Woodward Governor Pvt. Ltd. and ONGC, which recognized such losses as real and allowable under mercantile accounting. The CIT(A) also distinguished the facts from those covered by the CBDT instruction, which pertained to trading in foreign exchange derivatives, whereas the assessee’s transactions were for hedging business risks.

The Tribunal, after considering arguments and relevant judicial precedents, upheld the CIT(A)’s order. It noted that the issue was covered by various judicial pronouncements and Tribunal decisions, including Hindustan Gum & Chemical Ltd. and South Asian Petrochem Ltd., which supported the assessee’s claim for such losses as real and allowable. The appeal by the Revenue was dismissed.

Conclusion:

Both the appeals, one by the assessee and the other by the Revenue, were dismissed. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)’s orders on both issues, confirming the disallowance adjustments under Section 14A read with Rule 8D and allowing the deduction for provision for future loss on derivatives due to foreign exchange fluctuation.

---