2025 (2) TMI 602 - AT - Income Tax

Assessee gets partial relief as foreign commission allowed, Section 14A addition deleted, multiple issues remanded for verification

Intas Biopharmaceuticals Ltd. Versus The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, R-2 (1) (1), Ahmedabad.

Intas Biopharmaceuticals Ltd. Versus The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, R-2 (1) (1), Ahmedabad. - TMI 1. ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDEREDThe Tribunal considered several issues raised by the assessee in its appeal against the order of the CIT(A) for the Assessment Year 2012-13:Validity of the Assessment Order and the applicability of Section 14A and Rule 8D regarding disallowance of expenses related to exempt income.Disallowance under Section 43B concerning unpaid interest and bonus payments.Denial of deductions under Section 35 related to research and development (R&D) expenses.Excess deduction under Section 35(2AB) for clinical trials and R&D expenses.Recognition of grant received as income or liability.Disallowance of interest expenses and exchange fluctuation debits as capitalized expenses.Disallowance of foreign commission expenditure under Section 40(a)(ia).Denial of bad debts deduction.Inclusion of Section 14A disallowance in the computation of book profit under Section 115JB.Short credit for foreign tax incidence and TDS.Charging of interest under Sections 234A, 234B, 234C, and 234D.Determination of refund status as Nil.2. ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSISSection 14A and Rule 8D DisallowanceThe Tribunal remanded the issue back to the Assessing Officer (AO) for verification of whether the investments were made from interest-free funds and whether any administrative expenses were incurred. The Tribunal noted the need for a clear demonstration of the source of funds used for investments.Section 43B DisallowanceThe Tribunal found merit in the assessee's argument that the disallowance resulted in double disallowance and remanded the issue back to the AO for verification of the facts and proper adjudication.Section 35 R&D DeductionsThe Tribunal remanded the issue back to the AO for verification of reconciliation submitted by the assessee regarding the R&D expenditure and its treatment post-merger with Indus Biotherapeutics Ltd.Section 35(2AB) Excess DeductionThe Tribunal directed the AO to verify whether the DSIR approval was obtained and if the conditions under Section 35(2AB) were met, remanding the issue for further verification.Grant RecognitionThe Tribunal accepted the assessee's argument that the grant should be treated as a liability until the project is executed. The issue was decided in favor of the assessee.Interest and Exchange Fluctuation DisallowanceThe Tribunal remanded the issues back to the AO for verification of the nexus between borrowed funds and CWIP, and proper treatment of exchange fluctuation as per Section 43A.Foreign Commission ExpenditureThe Tribunal allowed the deduction, noting that the services were rendered outside India and did not attract TDS under Section 195, following the precedent set in the assessee's own case for A.Y. 2013-14.Bad Debts DeductionThe Tribunal remanded the issue back to the AO for verification, as the claim was linked to a previous year's disallowance and required further examination.Section 14A and Book Profit under Section 115JBThe Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, referencing the Special Bench decision in Vireet Investment, which precludes the addition of Section 14A disallowance to book profit.Foreign Tax Credit and TDS CreditThe Tribunal remanded the issue of foreign tax credit back to the AO for examination under Sections 90 and 91 and Rule 128. The issue of TDS credit was not pressed by the assessee and dismissed.Interest under Sections 234A, 234B, 234C, and 234DThe Tribunal did not adjudicate this issue, noting it as consequential.Refund StatusThe Tribunal did not adjudicate this issue, noting it as general.3. SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGSThe Tribunal emphasized the need for verification and proper adjudication by the AO on several issues, reflecting a focus on ensuring that all claims and disallowances are substantiated by evidence. The Tribunal's approach underscores the importance of procedural fairness and adherence to principles of natural justice.The Tribunal's decision to remand multiple issues for further verification highlights the necessity of clear and comprehensive documentation in tax proceedings. The Tribunal also reinforced the applicability of established legal precedents, such as the Special Bench decision in Vireet Investment, to ensure consistency in judicial decisions.Overall, the Tribunal's rulings reflect a balanced approach, allowing for both the correction of procedural errors and the opportunity for the assessee to substantiate its claims with appropriate evidence.