Tribunal upholds CIT(A) decisions, treats interest income as business income, and deletes disallowed business expenditure.

The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decisions, dismissing the Revenue's appeal. The disallowance of business expenditure of Rs. 7,65,94,120 was deleted, and interest income from fixed deposits amounting to Rs. 23,62,179 was treated as "Business Income." The Tribunal emphasized the consistency of the assessee's accounting method with recognized principles and previous judicial rulings. The order was pronounced on 31/03/2022.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Deletion of disallowance of business expenditure of Rs. 7,65,94,120.
2. Treatment of interest income of Rs. 23,62,179 from fixed deposits as "Business Income" instead of "Income from Other Sources."

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Deletion of Disallowance of Business Expenditure of Rs. 7,65,94,120:

The Revenue challenged the deletion of the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer (AO) regarding the business expenditure of Rs. 7,65,94,120 debited to the Profit & Loss account. The AO had added this amount to the construction Work-in-Progress (WIP) of the project under development by the assessee, a private limited company engaged in real estate development. The assessee follows the completed contract method for accounting and recognizes revenue when it is probable that economic benefits will flow and can be reliably measured.

The assessee argued that the administrative and selling expenses amounting to Rs. 7,65,94,120 were not directly related to the project and should be debited to the Profit & Loss account, in accordance with Accounting Standards (AS)-2 and AS-7, and the Guidance Note on "Accounting for Real Estate Transactions" issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI). These standards and guidelines specify that general administrative costs and selling costs should not be included in the cost of inventory for WIP.

Despite these submissions, the AO disallowed the expenses and added them to the closing WIP. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] deleted the disallowance by relying on a decision by the Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Hiranandani Palace Residence Pvt. Ltd., which supported the treatment of such expenses as revenue expenditure.

The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, citing consistency with the assessee's accounting method, which is in line with recognized accounting principles and has been accepted by the department in previous and subsequent years. The Tribunal emphasized that the AO did not provide a cogent reason for rejecting the method consistently followed by the assessee.

2. Treatment of Interest Income of Rs. 23,62,179 from Fixed Deposits as "Business Income":

The AO treated the interest income of Rs. 23,62,179 earned on fixed deposits as "Income from Other Sources," arguing that the funds were idle and citing the Supreme Court decision in Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd. However, the assessee contended that the funds were surplus business funds temporarily parked in fixed deposits, and the interest income should be considered as "Business Income."

The CIT(A) agreed with the assessee, stating that the business had commenced, and the funds were generated from business activities. The interest income was used to offset interest expenses on loans borrowed for business purposes, thus partaking the character of business income. The Tribunal supported this view, noting that the interest income would reduce the closing WIP of the construction project and should not be taxed separately as "Income from Other Sources."

The Tribunal also referenced a similar case, DCIT vs. Saudela Constructions Pvt. Ltd., where interest income from fixed deposits during the period between borrowing and deployment was treated as business income. Additionally, the Tribunal pointed out that similar interest income in the previous year (A.Y. 2014-15) was not added by the AO, reinforcing the principle of consistency.

Conclusion:

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, upholding the CIT(A)'s decisions on both issues. The disallowance of business expenditure was deleted, and the interest income from fixed deposits was treated as "Business Income," consistent with the assessee's accounting method and previous judicial precedents. The order was pronounced on 31/03/2022.

---