2025 (2) TMI 1370 - AT - Income Tax

Rule 8D allocation for exempt income investments and R&D weighted deduction upheld; commission and club expense disallowances deleted

While addressing disallowance for expenses relating to exempt income, the tribunal held that only investments that actually yielded exempt income in the ... Disallowance made u/s. 14A read with Rule 8D - suo motu disallowance made by the assessee - ssessee submitted that disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii) should be made after considering only the investments which have yielded exempt income during the year and not all the investment - HELD THAT:- It is now judicially well settled that while computing disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii) r.w.s 14A A.O. has to consider only those investment which yielded exempt income during the year under consideration. We direct the AO to recompute the disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii) by considering only those investments which yielded exempt income during the previous years relevant to assessment years under dispute. In case, the A.O. requires the details of investment yielding exempt income during the years under dispute, the assessee is directed to provide the same. Disallowance made of deduction claimed u/s. 35(2AB) - AO while examining assessee’s claim of weighted deduction u/s. 35(2AB) of the Act, noticed that the quantum of deduction claimed by the assessee is more than the expenditure certified by the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research (DSIR) in Form 3CL - CIT(A) deleted addition - HELD THAT:- While deciding identical issue in assessee’s own case in A.Ys. 2011-12 to 2014-15, the Tribunal has taken a consistent view that the assessee is entitled to avail the weighted deduction in respect of the expenditure incurred on Scientific Research irrespective of the quantum mentioned in the certificate issued by DSIR. Factual position being identical in the impugned assessment years, we do not find any reason to deviate from the consistent view expressed by the co-ordinate bench. Amendment to Form 3CL does not apply to the assessment years under dispute. In view of the aforesaid, we do not find any valid reason to interfere with the decision of learned first appellate authority. Grounds are dismissed. Disallowance of commission expenditure - alleging lack of evidence, A.O. proceeded to disallow 50% of the commission paid in both the assessment years under dispute - FAA deleted addition - HELD THAT:- Before us, it is a common point between the parties that while deciding identical issue in assessee’s own case in A.Ys. 2011-12 to 2014-15, the Tribunal has expressed that no disallowance out of commission expenses can be made. Finding parity of facts, we uphold the decision of learned first appellate authority in deleting addition. Disallowance made on account of club expense - FAA, having found that identical issue arising in assessee’s case in A.Ys. 2011-12 to 2014-15 have been decided in favour of the assessee by the Tribunal, followed the same and deleted the disallowance correctly. Issues: (i) Whether disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(iii) was correctly computed by the Assessing Officer; (ii) Whether deduction claimed under Section 35(2AB) should be disallowed to the extent it exceeded the expenditure certified by DSIR in Form 3CL; (iii) Whether disallowance of commission expenditure was justified where third-party confirmations were largely not received; (iv) Whether club expenditure deduction should be disallowed.Issue (i): Disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(iii).Analysis: The Tribunal examined whether the AO correctly applied Rule 8D(2)(iii) by considering the correct base of investments. It relied on settled judicial principle that Rule 8D(2)(iii) requires consideration only of investments that actually yielded exempt income in the year under consideration and directed recomputation accordingly. The Tribunal allowed the assessee to provide details of investments yielding exempt income if required by the AO.Conclusion: Disallowance under Section 14A/Rule 8D(2)(iii) to be recomputed by the AO considering only investments that yielded exempt income; decision in favour of the assessee on recomputation. Issue (ii): Deletion of disallowance of deduction claimed under Section 35(2AB).Analysis: The Tribunal noted that identical issues in prior assessment years had been decided consistently in favour of the assessee and examined applicability of an amendment to Form 3CL purportedly effective from 01.07.2016. The Tribunal found the factual position identical and held that the amendment did not apply to the assessment years under dispute and that the quantum stated in the DSIR certificate did not preclude allowing the weighted deduction where facts supported the claim.Conclusion: Deletion of disallowance under Section 35(2AB) is upheld; conclusion in favour of the assessee. Issue (iii): Deletion of disallowance of commission expenditure.Analysis: The Tribunal considered prior decisions in the assessee's own case where similar disallowances were deleted and found parity of facts. On that basis, and in the absence of distinguishing circumstances, the Tribunal followed the co-ordinate bench's consistent view and sustained deletion of the disallowance.Conclusion: Deletion of disallowance of commission expenditure is upheld; conclusion in favour of the assessee.Issue (iv): Deletion of disallowance of club expenditure.Analysis: The Tribunal found that the factual position was identical to earlier assessment years where the Tribunal had decided in favour of the assessee and, therefore, followed the consistent view of the co-ordinate bench to uphold deletion of the disallowance.Conclusion: Deletion of disallowance of club expenditure is upheld; conclusion in favour of the assessee.Final Conclusion: The appeals by the assessee are partly allowed by directing recomputation of the Section 14A/Rule 8D(2)(iii) disallowance confined to investments yielding exempt income, and all other contested disallowances challenged by the revenue are dismissed; the overall effect is partly in favour of the assessee.Ratio Decidendi: For computation under Rule 8D(2)(iii) only investments that yielded exempt income during the relevant year are to be taken into account; the quantum stated in a DSIR Form 3CL does not by itself preclude allowance of weighted deduction under Section 35(2AB) where facts entitle the assessee to the deduction.