Ground handling and cargo services qualify for Section 80IA deduction as airport development activities

The ITAT Delhi held that ground handling and cargo handling services qualify for deduction under Section 80IA as they fall within airport development, operation and maintenance activities. The Tribunal rejected the restrictive interpretation that airports are merely fixed structures, ruling that airport functionality encompasses all facilities providing utility to passengers and cargo operations. These services, though provided by different companies, operate interdependently as part of the airport ecosystem. Additionally, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision allowing year-end provisions for concession fees, finding no TDS liability under Section 194C as the provisions were estimates without actual income accrual to the payee.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Disallowance of deduction claimed u/s 80IA of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
2. Disallowance of provision for contingent liability.

Summary:

Issue 1: Disallowance of Deduction Claimed u/s 80IA

The Revenue challenged the CIT(A)'s direction to allow a deduction of Rs. 27,76,94,183/- claimed by the assessee u/s 80IA. The Revenue contended that the assessee, a joint venture between Air India Ltd. and SATS Ltd., Singapore, did not meet the criteria of being a company registered in India as required by Section 80IA(4)(i) of the Income-tax Act. Additionally, the Revenue argued that the assessee's activities of providing ground handling and cargo handling services at Indian Airports did not qualify as 'basic infrastructure facilities' under Section 80IA.

The Tribunal, referencing its earlier decision in the assessee's case for AY 2011-12, upheld the CIT(A)'s order. It noted that ground handling and cargo handling services are covered within the meaning of 'maintenance of Airport' under Section 80IA, as supported by the Karnataka High Court's judgment in Menzies Aviation Bobba (Bangalore) Pvt. Ltd. The Tribunal also rejected the Revenue's argument regarding the ownership structure, citing the Chennai Tribunal's decision in PSA Sical Terminals Ltd. vs. ACIT, which clarified that the shareholders of an Indian company need not be Indian companies. Further, the Tribunal affirmed that the assessee's formation was approved by the Government of India, fulfilling the requirement of an agreement with the Central Government.

The Tribunal concluded that the assessee's activities and formation met the conditions of Section 80IA, thus allowing the deduction.

Issue 2: Disallowance of Provision for Contingent Liability

The Revenue also contested the deletion of a disallowance of Rs. 3,48,08,595/- made by the AO on account of contingent liability. The AO had disallowed the provision for concession fees, arguing it was unascertained and thus contingent. The CIT(A) deleted the disallowance, noting that the assessee followed the mercantile system of accounting and created provisions based on estimated turnover, which were later adjusted upon receipt of actual invoices.

The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, referencing the Supreme Court's ruling in Bharat Earth Movers, which allows deductions for business liabilities that have arisen in the accounting year, even if quantification occurs later. The Tribunal also noted that similar provisions in subsequent years were accepted by the Department without disallowance, reinforcing the assessee's position.

Consequently, the Tribunal found no infirmity in the CIT(A)'s order and dismissed the Revenue's appeal on this ground.

Conclusion:

The appeals by the Revenue for both assessment years 2012-13 and 2013-14 were dismissed, affirming the CIT(A)'s orders in favor of the assessee.

Order pronounced in the open court on 09.04.2024.

---