TMI Blog2012 (12) TMI 166X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... expenses incurred were pure and simple administrative expenses, monitoring the requirements of finance and other action which are necessary in running of the business. In favour of assessee - Tax Case (Appeal) No.219 of 2006, 267, 269, 270, 273 and 274 of 2008 - - - Dated:- 24-9-2012 - MRS. CHITRA VENKATARAMAN AND MR. K.RAVICHANDRABAABU JJ. For Appellant: Mr. T. Ravikumar For Respondent: Dr. Anitha Sumanth ------- JUDGMENT CHITRA VENKATARAMAN, JJ. The above Tax Case (Appeals) are at the instance of the Revenue against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for assessment years 1991-92, 1993-94, 1995-96, 1994-95, 1996-97 and 1997-98 respectively. The Tax Case Nos.267 to 276 of 2008 are admitted on th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nance Act, 2001 with effect from 1.4.62?" On a perusal, we find that the questions are not common to all Tax Cases, hence, question relating to each Tax case is discussed in the respective orders. As far as T.C.(A).Nos. 267, 269, 270, 273 and 274 of 2008 are concerned, they are relating to following substantial questions of law alone:- (1) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal was right in holding that the common head office expenses cannot be apportioned to the various units on the basis of their respective turnover for the purpose of calculation of deduction under Section 10B, 80I and 80HH? 2. The assessee herein, Ponds India Limited got amalgamated with Hindustan Lever Limited, Mumbai with effect from 15 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d out that the Head office monitored the requirement of finance and other action which were necessary for running all the units. Consequently, the administrative expenses though relatable to the various units, are expenses incurred in general, towards the well-being of the business. Thus, the Tribunal granted the relief to the assessee holding that the head office expenses could not be proportionately distributed among the various units or allotted to any particular unit independently. The order passed by the Tribunal had not been canvassed by the Revenue before this Court by way of filing any Tax Case (Appeal) and that the order of the Tribunal had attained finality. Present Tax Case (Appeal) is filed by the Revenue as against the orders ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r evidence is produced the Agricultural Income Tax Officer shall proceed to assess the income to the best of his judgment." 5. Referring to Rule 5 of the Karnataka Agricultural Income Tax Rules, the Supreme Court pointed out that the crucial words in the said rule are that the deductions admissible under the Act shall be the actual amount relating to the income derived from agricultural operations and proved by accounts or other conclusive evidence. Where no such accounts or evidence available, the Assessing Officer can proceed to asses the income to the best of his judgment. In confirming the view of the Karnataka High Court, the Supreme Court also affirmed the similar view rendered by this Court in the decision reported in 130 ITR 908 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee does not claim any deduction on the expenses incurred by the Head Office. The only question is as to whether the common expenses incurred by the Head Office for the purpose of maintaining the units would nevertheless be subjected to the doctrine of proportionality for the purpose of deduction. 8. As already pointed out, the department had no grievance as regards the order passed by the Tribunal for preceding years 1984-85 onwards and that the expenses incurred were pure and simple administrative expenses, monitoring the requirements of finance and other action which are necessary in running of the business. 9. We do not find any justifiable ground to accept the plea of the Revenue. Consequently, the above Tax Case (Appeals) are r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
