Parking and food sales in SEZ deemed IT/ITES business income; deductible under 80IB; late TDS interest allowed under 37
ITAT DELHI - AT allowed the appeal, holding that receipts from car parking rentals and sale of food and beverages in the SEZ fall within notified IT/ITES activities and constitute income from the business of developing and operating the SEZ, making them eligible for deduction under section 80IB. The bench set aside the departmental disallowance. It also held that interest on late TDS is a business expenditure deductible under section 37; the addition of such interest as income was vacated and the matter remanded to the AO for verification and fresh order after hearing.
ISSUES PRESENTED AND CONSIDERED
1. Whether income derived from sale of food and beverages (and allied services such as car parking) within premises developed and leased as an SEZ/industrial park is income eligible for deduction under Section 80IAB (i.e., to be treated as income from business of developing/operating SEZ) rather than being excluded from such deduction.
2. Whether interest paid on delayed deposit of tax deducted at source (TDS) is an allowable business expenditure under Section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act or is exigible to be treated as income under the head "Income from Other Sources" (and whether a double addition on account of same interest can stand).
ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS
Issue 1 - Treatment of income from sale of food/beverages and allied services in an SEZ for Section 80IAB
Legal framework: Section 80IAB (as applicable in the facts) grants deduction for income of undertakings engaged in developing/operating industrial parks/SEZs subject to conditions prescribed under notified schemes. The tax characterisation of receipts (business income v. other heads) determines eligibility.
Precedent Treatment: The Court/Tribunal relied upon administrative guidance (Board Circular treating lease/letting with amenities in notified industrial parks/SEZ as business income) and on coordinate tribunal decisions holding that permitted SEZ activities (including food services, cafeterias, food courts, restaurants, parking etc.) fall within authorized operations and thus form part of the SEZ developer/operator's business income eligible for deduction.
Interpretation and reasoning: The Tribunal examined the BOA/Ministry of Commerce authorizations and the Ministry's notification listing "Food Services including Cafeteria, food court(s), Restaurants, coffee shops, canteens and catering facilities" and parking as authorized SEZ operations. It gave weight to the CBDT Circular (no. 16/2017) which directs that income from letting out premises/developed space along with other amenities in an industrial park/SEZ is to be treated as business income where conditions of the scheme are met. The Tribunal accepted that income from sale of food and beverages (and car parking receipts) arises in the course of the assessee's development/operation of SEZ and is an integral and authorized part of the business activity rather than a separate non-qualifying receipt.
Ratio vs. Obiter: Ratio - Where a developer/operator is authorized to undertake food services and allied activities within an SEZ and the receipts arise from letting/operation of the developed SEZ space and amenities, such receipts constitute business income of the SEZ developer/operator and are capable of being considered for deduction under Section 80IAB (subject to conditions). Obiter - Observations regarding specific earlier adverse decisions in the assessee's other assessment year and detailed policy history are incidental to the core holding.
Conclusions: The Tribunal set aside the departmental authorities' disallowance and held the income from sale of food and beverages (and allied SEZ amenities) to be in the nature of business income of the SEZ developer/operator and therefore eligible for consideration under Section 80IAB, following CBDT Circular and relevant notifications and coordinate precedents. Ground relating to denial of Section 80IAB relief was allowed.
Issue 2 - Allowability of interest on delayed deposit of TDS as business expenditure (Section 37) and treatment as income from other sources / double addition
Legal framework: Section 37(1) permits deduction of any expenditure (not otherwise expressly disallowed) laid out wholly and exclusively for the purposes of business or profession. The character of statutory interest (penalty/compensatory) determines allowability. Classification of receipts or reversals in assessment must avoid double taxation via duplicate additions under different heads.
Precedent Treatment: The Tribunal considered judicial authority holding that interest/penalty which is compensatory in nature may be deductible under Section 37 if it is incurred in relation to business, and more recent tribunal decisions which have held interest on late TDS payment to be compensatory and therefore allowable as business expenditure. It also relied on a coordinate tribunal decision treating late-TDS interest as allowable under Section 37.
Interpretation and reasoning: The Tribunal noted the Revenue's assessment practice of adding back the interest on late TDS to profits and then again treating it as income from other sources, producing a double disallowance. It accepted the view that withholding tax liability is a vicarious statutory obligation arising in the course of business and that interest incurred on late discharge of that statutory obligation is compensatory in nature and can be an allowable business expenditure under Section 37, subject to factual verification. Given existing coordinate judgments treating such interest as deductible, the Tribunal found it inappropriate to sustain the addition as income from other sources without proper verification and hearing.
Ratio vs. Obiter: Ratio - Interest paid on late payment of TDS, being compensatory and incurred in the course of business, is prima facie allowable under Section 37 and should not be treated as income under "Income from Other Sources"; a previous addition must not be replicated under another head leading to double disallowance. Obiter - References to various tribunal decisions and comparative discussion of vicarious liability principles are supportive reasoning rather than independent binding holdings beyond the present facts.
Conclusions: The Tribunal set aside the addition treating the interest on late TDS as income from other sources and remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh verification and adjudication after affording opportunity of hearing. The Tribunal directed that the Assessing Officer examine the allowability of the interest under Section 37 in light of precedents and administrative guidance, avoiding duplicate additions.
Cross-references and Interaction of Issues
1. The resolution of Issue 1 relied on administrative notifications (permitted operations in SEZ) and the CBDT Circular (treating letting with amenities in notified industrial parks/SEZ as business income) and thus forms the basis for allowing Section 80IAB relief; Issue 2's allowability analysis proceeded independently but relied on coordinated tribunal jurisprudence.
2. The Tribunal gave precedence to administrative instructions and coordinate bench decisions in both issues, explicitly following the CBDT Circular and relevant tribunal authorities rather than earlier adverse findings in different assessment years that did not give effect to authorisation letters/notifications.
Final Disposition
The Tribunal allowed the appeal on the Section 80IAB issue (income from sale of food and beverages and allied SEZ amenities held to be business income eligible for deduction consideration) and allowed the ground on interest on late TDS by setting aside the addition as income from other sources and remanding the issue for verification and fresh order consistent with law and precedents.
TaxTMI 
AI Drafter ✕
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
