2013 (12) TMI 540 - HC - Income Tax

Deduction u/s 37(1) - contribution made to M.S. Udyog Bandhu and payment made to H.B.T.I. - nature of expenses - wholly and exclusively for the assessee s business - held that - setting up of the Park would promote the business of the appellant because with more entrepreneurs setting up businesses in the State, the role of the appellant would become significant for providing them the necessary finance. The appeal is concluded by findings of fact. No substantial question arises for consideration in this appeal.The deduction was clearly permissible under Section 37(1) of the Act, 1961. - Decided in favor of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Allowability of contribution to M.S. Udyog Bandhu as a deduction under Section 37 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
2. Allowability of payment made to H.B.T.I., Kanpur as a deduction under Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Analysis:
The appeal was filed against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) dismissing the Department's appeal regarding the deletion of disallowance of contributions made to M.S. Udyog Bandhu and payment to H.B.T.I., Kanpur. The Tribunal confirmed the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)], leading to the current appeal. The substantial questions of law raised were related to the allowability of these contributions as deductions under Section 37 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

In a previous case, similar questions regarding the disallowance of expenses claimed as contributions to Udyog Bandhu were considered by a Division Bench of the Court. The Division Bench dismissed the appeal, stating that the contribution could be considered as business expenses incidental to the assessee's business and covered under the Act. Therefore, no substantial question arose in that appeal.

Regarding the payment made to H.B.T.I., Kanpur for the construction of a Science and Technology Entrepreneur Park, the CIT(A) had deleted the disallowance of Rs. 5 lakhs. The CIT(A) found that the action of the Assessing Officer was not justified as the appellant corporation, owned by the Government of U.P., was directed to make the payment. The setting up of the Park was deemed to promote the appellant's business by attracting entrepreneurs to the State. The Tribunal upheld this decision, emphasizing that the deduction was permissible under Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

The Court endorsed the views of the CIT(A) and the Tribunal, concluding that the establishment of the Park would enhance the appellant's business by attracting entrepreneurs and providing necessary finance. As the appeal was based on findings of fact, no substantial question arose for consideration. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, affirming the allowability of the deductions under Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.