2025 (8) TMI 196 - AT - Income Tax

Interest on Late TDS Payment Deductible Under Section 37(1); Sales Promotion and Prior Expenses Allowed

ITAT Kolkata allowed the assessee's claim that interest on late payment of TDS is deductible under section 37(1) as a business expense, rejecting the ... Interest on non-deduction of TDS/late payment of TDS - allowable business expenditure u/s 37(1) - HELD THAT:- We find that the issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the case of Welkin Telecom Infra [2022 (5) TMI 1140 - ITAT KOLKATA] as held the withholding tax/TDS is not in the nature of ‘income-tax’ as defined for the purposes of section 40(a)(ii) of the Act. Instead the TDS deducted and paid on the business expenditure and is thus a deductible item u/s 37 of the Act. Sales promotion expenses - AO did not specifically point out any deficiency in claim of expenditure except stating that they were internally vouched. Disallowance of expenditure u/s 37(1) is warranted only if assessee is unable to establish that such expenditure was incurred wholly and exclusively for the purposes of the business. There is no record of assessee having failed to produce the relevant material for examination and neither is there any justification provided in the order for disallowance of 10 percent of the expenses claimed. Disallowance of expenses is deleted. Allowing 100% depreciation on hoardings, ostensibly ignoring the fact that iron hoardings have an enduring benefit - We find that this issue is also covered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue as relying on [2015 (1) TMI 1523 - ITAT KOLKATA]. Prior period expenses allowed. Deduction u/s 80IA - Revenue's contention is that the assessee is only an advertising firm putting banner for their own purpose and, therefore, the question of claiming of any deduction under section 80IA of the Act would not arise - This appears to be factually incorrect as is seen from the order passed by the CIT [A] as well as the Tribunal where the Tribunal has clearly held that the assessee is engaged in infrastructure development which involves construction of foot over bridge as well as the bus shelter and, therefore, the assessee is entitled to deduction under section 80IA. ISSUES: Whether interest paid on non-deduction or late payment of TDS is allowable as business expenditure under the Income Tax Act.Whether sales promotion expenses can be disallowed without specific verification or pointing out deficiencies.Whether 100% depreciation on iron hoardings can be allowed despite their enduring benefit.Whether prior period expenses are allowable under the Income Tax Act.Whether deduction under section 80IA of the Income Tax Act is permissible for expenditure on infrastructure development such as toilet blocks, bus shelters, and foot over bridges. RULINGS / HOLDINGS: The interest paid on TDS is allowable as business expenditure under section 37 of the Act, as the withholding tax/TDS is not in the nature of 'income-tax' for the purposes of section 40(a)(ii) and is deductible as business expenditure.Sales promotion expenses cannot be disallowed merely on the basis that they were internally vouched without any specific deficiency being pointed out; disallowance under section 37(1) requires failure to establish that expenditure was wholly and exclusively for business purposes.100% depreciation on iron hoardings is allowable as the issue has been consistently decided in favour of the assessee by the Tribunal, rejecting the characterization of hoardings as permanent structures with enduring benefit.Prior period expenses are allowable, supported by precedent including decisions of the Calcutta High Court and the Tribunal, which have upheld such claims under the facts of the case.Deduction under section 80IA is allowable for expenditure on infrastructure development, including toilet blocks, bus shelters, and foot over bridges, as per the explanation to section 80IA(4), supported by binding High Court decisions in similar matters. RATIONALE: The Court applied the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961, particularly sections 30 to 37, 40(a)(ii), 43B, and 80IA, along with judicial precedents from coordinate benches of the Tribunal and the Calcutta High Court.On the interest on TDS issue, the Court relied on the principle that TDS is a vicarious liability of the payer and the gross amount including TDS is deductible under section 37, distinguishing it from income-tax disallowance under section 40(a)(ii).The Court emphasized the requirement of specific evidence or deficiency to disallow business expenses under section 37(1), rejecting mechanical or general disallowances.The Court followed consistent Tribunal decisions that iron hoardings do not constitute permanent structures precluding 100% depreciation, reflecting a settled interpretation.Regarding prior period expenses and section 80IA deductions, the Court relied on binding High Court rulings that clarified the scope of allowable expenditures and infrastructure development under the Act, affirming the Tribunal's findings.