Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2012 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2012 (8) TMI 371 - AT - Income TaxDeduction of expenses incurred at the head office directly in relation to Indian branches - expenses incurred for solicitation of deposits from NRI I.E. NRI marketing expenses - Non-resident banking company – assessee contended the same to be not covered by the provisions of section 44C – Held that:- Exclusive expenses incurred by the head office for Indian branch are outside the purview of sec. 44C and only common head office expenses are governed by this section. Once the amount is found to be incurred exclusively by H.O. towards the Indian branch, the same is required to be allowed in terms of section 37(1) without any reference to section 44C. See ADIT(I.T.) Vs. Bank of Bahrain & Kuwait (2011 (1) TMI 923 - ITAT, MUMBAI ), CIT v. Emirates Commercial Bank Limited (2003 (4) TMI 2 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT) - Decided in favor of assessee Entertainment expenses – dis-allowance u/s 37(2) - assessee estimated dis-allowance at 30% whereas AO increased the dis-allowance to 80% - application of provision in Article 7(3) of the India-USA DTAA - Held that:- Qualification in Article 7(3) of the DTAA that the expenses will be allowed “in accordance with the provisions of and subject to the limitations of the taxation laws of that State” applies to all expenditure incurred for the business of the PE and not merely to Section 44C alone. It, therefore, follows that the deductibility of expenses in assessee’s case is subject to the relevant provisions including section 37(2) under the provisions of DTAA. Dis-allowance computed at 50 %. The fact that the assessee’s interpretation was accepted in earlier year does not mean that it cannot be departed with when several orders have been subsequently rendered by various benches of the Tribunal taking contrary view. Dis-allowance u/s 14A - Interest on tax free bonds – gross interest claimed as exempt u/s 10(15)(iv) – assessee contended that provisions of section 14A are not applicable where the shares are held as stock in trade - Held that:- Here assessee has tried to make out a case that main purpose of the holding of shares was to earn income from sale and the dividend income was just incidental to such holding. Section 14A talks of making dis-allowance of expenses incurred in relation to an income not chargeable to tax. No exception, such as the dividend being main or incidental income, has been carved out in the provision. The relation of expenses for dis-allowance is with the exempt income irrespective of the source or nature of the exempt income. When the legislature in its wisdom has not spelt out any exception coming in the way of applicability of section 14A, it is wholly impermissible to artificially find any such exception contrary to the language of the provision and the intention of the legislature. Dis-allowance u/s 14A is warranted – Decided against assessee. Dis-allowance u/s 14A - expenditure attributable to earning the interest income and dividend liable to tax at special rate u/s 115A – Held that:- Judgment of Supreme Court in Rajasthan State Warehousing Corporation (2000 (2) TMI 5 - SUPREME COURT ) is authority for the proposition that if an assessee is carrying an indivisible business then the entire expenditure including that which was incurred for earning the tax free income would be a permissible deduction. What has been inhibited by section 14A is the deduction of expenses incurred by the assessee in relation to income not at all chargeable to tax and not the income chargeable to tax at lower rate of tax. Therefore, deduction allowed against the income chargeable to tax at the regular rate of tax – Decided against Revenue. Club expenses – dis-allowance – Held that:- Issue covered in favour of the assessee. See Otis Elevator Co. (India) Ltd. v. CIT [1991 (4) TMI 53 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT ]
|