NBFC wins on NPA interest recognition, section 43B deductions, and recurring deposit taxation

Calcutta HC ruled in favor of the assessee on three tax issues. First, regarding interest on non-performing assets (NPA), the court held that for NBFCs governed by RBI Act provisions, interest income cannot be deemed accrued when recovery possibility is nil under RBI prudential norms. Second, on section 43B deductions, interest expenses can only be deducted when actually paid, regardless of accounting method. Third, concerning recurring deposit interest, since the assessee properly offered accrued interest for taxation in assessment year 2005-06, earlier additions by the assessing officer were incorrect. The ITAT's order favoring the assessee was upheld.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Deduction of interest amount u/s 43B(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
2. Deletion of addition of interest from non-performing assets (NPA) u/s 43D of the Act.
3. Deletion of interest on recurring deposits.

Summary of the Judgment:

Issue 1: Deduction of Interest Amount u/s 43B(d)
The court considered whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) was correct in allowing a deduction of Rs. 1,40,77,397/- under Section 43B(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, despite the amount not being debited to the profit and loss account or claimed in the return. The ITAT found that the interest was indeed paid during the relevant assessment year and thus allowable under section 43B(d), irrespective of the method of accounting followed by the assessee. The court upheld the ITAT's decision, referencing the Supreme Court's ruling in Wipro Industries Limited v. Commissioner of Income Tax, which allows appellate authorities to entertain fresh claims not made in the original return. Thus, the substantial question of law was answered in favor of the assessee.

Issue 2: Deletion of Addition of Interest from Non-Performing Assets (NPA)
The court examined whether the ITAT properly construed the provisions of Section 43D of the Act in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,24,31,423/- as interest from non-performing assets. The ITAT's decision was supported by the Delhi High Court's judgment in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Vasisth Chay Vyapar Ltd., which was affirmed by the Supreme Court. The court agreed that interest on NPAs, which are not received and where recovery is uncertain, cannot be treated as accrued income. Therefore, the substantial question of law was answered in favor of the assessee.

Issue 3: Deletion of Interest on Recurring Deposits
The court considered whether the ITAT erred in directing the deletion of interest on recurring deposits amounting to Rs. 11,74,79,000/-. The ITAT found that the interest on recurring deposits was not payable until maturity and thus, could not be taxed annually. The ITAT's findings were supported by the Kerala High Court's judgment in CIT v. Federal Bank Ltd., which held that interest on securities accrues only upon maturity. The court noted that the entire interest was accounted for and taxed in the assessment year 2005-06. Consequently, the substantial question of law was answered in favor of the assessee.

Conclusion:
The court dismissed both appeals filed by the revenue, answering all substantial questions of law in favor of the assessee and against the revenue.

---