2007 (4) TMI 284 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal Rulings on Tax Deductions & Income Treatment

Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax. Versus Asea Brown Boveri Limited.

Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax. Versus Asea Brown Boveri Limited. - TTJ 110, 502, [2007] 14 SOT 18 (MUM.) (URO) Issues Involved:1. Disallowance of Guest House Expenses u/s 37(4)2. Taxation of Cash Compensatory Assistance and Duty Drawback3. Deduction under s. 80-O for Technical Fees4. Deduction under s. 80-IA for New Industrial Undertakings5. Allocation of Head Office Expenses for s. 80-I Deduction6. Disallowance of Gratuity under s. 43B7. Computation of Business Income for s. 80HHC and s. 80HHE8. Taxability of Profits from Sale of Transportation Business9. Taxability of Interest on Delayed Sale Consideration10. Taxability of Non-Compete Fees11. Disallowance of Customs Duty under s. 43BSummary:1. Disallowance of Guest House Expenses u/s 37(4)The Tribunal dismissed the assessee's appeal against the disallowance of Rs. 62,26,739 incurred on guest house expenses. The assessee conceded that the issue was concluded against them by the Supreme Court judgment in Britannia Industries Ltd. vs. CIT.2. Taxation of Cash Compensatory Assistance and Duty DrawbackThe Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to tax cash compensatory assistance and duty drawback on an accrual basis. The assessee's method of accounting was inconsistent, recognizing these incomes on an accrual basis for company accounts but on a receipt basis for tax purposes. The Tribunal followed the statutory provisions and relevant case law, confirming the accrual basis for tax purposes.3. Deduction under s. 80-O for Technical FeesThe Tribunal dismissed the assessee's appeal, noting that the issue was concluded against the assessee by the jurisdictional High Court in CIT vs. Asian Cable Corporation Ltd., which restricted the deduction under s. 80-O to 90% of the fees received.4. Deduction under s. 80-IA for New Industrial UndertakingsThe Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision rejecting the assessee's claim for deduction under s. 80-IA for new industrial undertakings. The Tribunal followed its earlier decision in the assessee's appeal for asst. yr. 1989-90, finding no reason to deviate from the previous ruling.5. Allocation of Head Office Expenses for s. 80-I DeductionThe Tribunal confirmed the CIT(A)'s decision to allocate head office expenses to the profits of industrial undertakings for s. 80-I deduction. The Tribunal emphasized that all expenses, whether direct or indirect, must be considered to determine the net profits derived from the industrial undertaking.6. Disallowance of Gratuity under s. 43BThe Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision disallowing the deduction for gratuity paid after the end of the previous year but before filing the return. The Tribunal noted that the liability was not incurred during the year under appeal, and the payment was not made within the relevant previous year, thus falling under the purview of s. 43B.7. Computation of Business Income for s. 80HHC and s. 80HHEThe Tribunal restored the issue to the AO to re-examine the exclusion of 90% of interest, rental, commission, and sundry income from business profits under cl. (baa) of Explanation to s. 80HHC. The Tribunal directed the AO to follow the principles laid down in the Special Bench decision in Lalsons Enterprises vs. Dy. CIT.8. Taxability of Profits from Sale of Transportation BusinessThe Tribunal confirmed the CIT(A)'s finding that the sale of the transportation business was not a slump sale. The Tribunal directed the AO to tax the profits attributable to inventories as business profits, compute capital gains on depreciable assets under s. 50, and examine the taxability of the remaining sale consideration.9. Taxability of Interest on Delayed Sale ConsiderationThe Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to tax interest on delayed sale consideration on a revenue basis. The Tribunal rejected the assessee's claim that the interest should be treated as part of the sale consideration.10. Taxability of Non-Compete FeesThe Tribunal confirmed the CIT(A)'s finding that the non-compete fee was not in lieu of a restrictive covenant and was a colorable device to avoid tax. The Tribunal restored the issue to the AO to consider its taxability under the appropriate head.11. Disallowance of Customs Duty under s. 43BThe Tribunal allowed the assessee's claim for deduction of customs duty paid and included in the closing stock, following the Supreme Court decision in Berger Paints vs.