Tribunal rulings on tax claim, deductions, and remanded issues

The Tribunal upheld the rejection of the assessee's claim for deemed payment of sales tax under Section 43B and disallowance of depreciation on capitalized goods. It reversed the disallowance of deduction under Section 80IB(9) for the SEZ Undertaking, depreciation on intangible assets, and CSR expenses under Section 37(1). The Tribunal remanded the issue of depreciation on office equipment and arm's length mark-up on Business Support Services for further verification. It directed acceptance of the rate charged by DGVCL for inter-unit transfer of power and granted deductions under Section 10AA and weighted deduction under Section 35(1)(ii) based on legal interpretations and consistency principles.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Deemed payment of sales tax under Section 43B.
2. Depreciation on capitalized value of goods.
3. Depreciation on office equipment.
4. Deduction under Section 80IB(9) for SEZ Undertaking.
5. Depreciation on intangible assets.
6. Deduction of corporate social responsibility (CSR) expenses under Section 37(1).
7. Reference to Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO).
8. Guarantee commission for corporate guarantees.
9. Arm's length mark-up on Business Support Services (BSS).
10. Transfer pricing adjustment for inter-unit transfer of power.
11. Additional grounds regarding interest on tax-free bonds, notional sales tax incentive, Section 14A disallowance, weighted deduction under Section 35(1)(ii), and deduction under Section 10AA.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Deemed Payment of Sales Tax under Section 43B:
The assessee's claim for a deemed payment of sales tax under Section 43B was rejected by the CIT(A). The Tribunal upheld this rejection, noting that the issue is covered against the assessee by earlier ITAT orders in the assessee's own case.

2. Depreciation on Capitalized Value of Goods:
The CIT(A) confirmed the disallowance of depreciation on the capitalized value of goods purchased from Durga Iron & Steel Ltd. and Surajbhan Rajkumar Pvt. Ltd. in A.Y. 2003-2004. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, agreeing that the issue is covered against the assessee.

3. Depreciation on Office Equipment:
The CIT(A) remanded the appellant's claim of depreciation on office equipment at 15% to the file of the Assessing Officer for verification. The Tribunal noted that the assessee did not press this ground, and thus, it was dismissed as not pressed.

4. Deduction under Section 80IB(9) for SEZ Undertaking:
The CIT(A) disallowed the deduction under Section 80IB(9) for the SEZ Undertaking, holding that once a claim under Section 10AA has been made, no deduction under Section 80IB(9) is allowed. The Tribunal reversed this decision, citing its own earlier orders and the principle of consistency, allowing the deduction under Section 80IB(9) for the SEZ Undertaking.

5. Depreciation on Intangible Assets:
The CIT(A) confirmed the disallowance of depreciation on intangible assets related to KG-DWN-98/3 (KGD) assets. The Tribunal noted that the assessee did not press this ground, and thus, it was dismissed as not pressed.

6. Deduction of CSR Expenses under Section 37(1):
The CIT(A) disallowed the deduction of CSR expenses under Section 37(1), stating that it does not fall under business expenditure. The Tribunal reversed this decision, noting that the amendment to Section 37(1) disallowing CSR expenses is effective from April 1, 2015, and cannot be applied retrospectively. Therefore, CSR expenses incurred before this date are allowable under Section 37(1).

7. Reference to TPO:
The Tribunal noted that the grounds related to the reference to the TPO were general and linked to other transfer pricing adjustments. Specific issues related to the TPO's actions were addressed in subsequent grounds.

8. Guarantee Commission for Corporate Guarantees:
The CIT(A) upheld the TPO's determination of the arm's length price (ALP) of the guarantee commission at 0.38% for short-term guarantees. The Tribunal upheld this decision, noting that the yield spread approach adopted by the assessee was accepted in earlier years.

9. Arm's Length Mark-up on BSS:
The CIT(A) determined the arm's length mark-up on BSS at 8.20%, rejecting some of the assessee's comparables and accepting others. The Tribunal remanded the issue to the TPO for fresh consideration, noting that the comparables selected by the assessee need to be reconsidered.

10. Transfer Pricing Adjustment for Inter-unit Transfer of Power:
The CIT(A) upheld the TPO's adjustment for the inter-unit transfer of power, determining the ALP at INR 6.155 per KWH. The Tribunal reversed this decision, citing its own earlier orders and the principle of consistency, and directed that the rate charged by DGVCL should be accepted.

11. Additional Grounds:

Interest on Tax-Free Bonds:
The Tribunal remanded the issue to the Assessing Officer for verification, noting that interest on tax-free bonds is exempt under Section 10(15)(iv)(h) and should be excluded from both normal provisions and book profit under Section 115JB.

Notional Sales Tax Incentive:
The Tribunal remanded the issue to the Assessing Officer, directing that the notional sales tax incentive, being a capital receipt, should be excluded from book profit under Section 115JB.

Section 14A Disallowance:
The Tribunal noted that disallowance under Section 14A cannot be added under Section 115JB, following the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court.

Weighted Deduction under Section 35(1)(ii):
The Tribunal admitted the additional ground and evidence for weighted deduction under Section 35(1)(ii) and remanded the issue to the Assessing Officer for verification.

Deduction under Section 10AA:
The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to grant the deduction under Section 10AA with reference to the "profits and gains" as determined by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vijay Industries, which means gross profits before computing income as specified in Sections 30 to 43D.

In conclusion, the Tribunal provided a comprehensive analysis of each issue, upholding some decisions of the lower authorities while reversing others based on legal precedents and the principle of consistency.

---