9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (8) TMI 925 - AT - Income TaxAddition made on account of premium amortization expenses - Held that - The allowability of amortized expenses on premium on Government Securities has been provided u/s. 36(1)(ii) of the provisions have been clarified and explained by CBDT New Delhi vide Instruction No. 17 of 2008 dated 26.11.2008. As per this clarification investments of banks classified under HTM (Held to Maturity) category need not be marked to market and are carried at acquisition cost unless these are more than the face value in which case the premium should be amortized over the period remaining to maturity. On the basis of this Instruction different Tribunals as mentioned above by assessee have allowed the amortized expenditure. The AO has ignored the provisions of Instruction which is binding on him while discussing the issue and disallowing the expenditure. Since the Instructions and Circulars are binding in nature on AOs and different Tribunals have given decisions against the revenue respectfully following the same ground of appeal of assessee is allowed Addition made on account of Gift expenses - Held that - As in the case Taluka Co-op. & Sale Union Ltd. (1980 (9) TMI 85 - GUJARAT High Court) where expenditure incurred for purchase of articles for presentation only to its members for keeping alive good image among members and for generating goodwill and ensuring continuity of business with member societies was geld to be expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business. Addition made on account of Staff Ex-Gratia - Held that - Since Ld. CIT(A) has given relief to the assessee in view of the fact that expenses being regularly incurred and claimed by the assessee and worked out on the basis of Memorandum of Understanding it is ascertainable liability which is allowable as per the provision of the Act we are not inclined to interfere with the order passed by Ld. CIT(A) and the same is hereby upheld Addition made on account of disallowance of Special Long Term Finance Fund claimed u/s. 36(1)(vii) - Held that - Since the finding of the Ld. CIT(A) that assessee has credited a sum of Rs. 17, 50, 000/- to the special reserve which is less than 20% of the profit remained uncontroverted at the time of hearing before us we feel no need to interfere with the order passed by him and the same is hereby upheld. This ground of the revenue is also dismissed.
Issues Involved:
1. Deletion of addition made on account of premium amortization expenses. 2. Deletion of addition made on account of gift expenses. 3. Deletion of addition made on account of staff ex-gratia. 4. Deletion of addition made on account of disallowance of Special Long Term Finance Fund expenses claimed under section 36(1)(viii) of the Income Tax Act. Detailed Analysis: 1. Deletion of addition made on account of premium amortization expenses: The first issue relates to the deletion of the addition of Rs. 23,09,727/- made on account of premium amortization expenses. The assessee, a Co-operative Society engaged in banking, claimed this expense based on the RBI guidelines which mandate amortization of the premium paid on Government Securities over the period until maturity. The Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed this claim, arguing that the Income Tax Act does not provide for such amortization. However, the CIT(A) allowed the claim referencing CBDT Instruction No. 17 of 2008 and supporting tribunal decisions which clarified that such amortization is permissible under section 36(1)(ii). The appellate tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, confirming that the amortization of premium on Government Securities is an allowable expenditure under the Income Tax Act. 2. Deletion of addition made on account of gift expenses: The second issue concerns the deletion of the addition of Rs. 17,10,728/- made on account of gift expenses. The assessee distributed gifts to its members to maintain goodwill and ensure business continuity. The AO disallowed these expenses, considering them altruistic and not business-related. However, the CIT(A) allowed the expenses, citing the Gujarat High Court's decision in Daskroi Taluka Co-operative & Sales Union Ltd., which held that such expenses are for business purposes. The appellate tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s order, agreeing that the expenses were incurred wholly and exclusively for the business. 3. Deletion of addition made on account of staff ex-gratia: The third issue involves the deletion of the addition of Rs. 38,37,116/- made on account of staff ex-gratia. The AO disallowed this provision, considering it a contingent liability. The assessee argued that the ex-gratia was based on a Memorandum of Understanding with the employees' union and was an ascertained liability. The CIT(A) accepted this argument, noting that similar expenses were allowed in previous years and were based on a binding agreement. The appellate tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, recognizing the ex-gratia as an allowable business expenditure. 4. Deletion of addition made on account of disallowance of Special Long Term Finance Fund expenses claimed under section 36(1)(viii): The fourth issue pertains to the deletion of the addition of Rs. 17,50,000/- made on account of disallowance of Special Long Term Finance Fund expenses claimed under section 36(1)(viii). The AO disallowed the claim, stating that the assessee failed to prove that the amount set aside constituted 20% of the profits from eligible business. The assessee provided detailed calculations showing compliance with the statutory requirement. The CIT(A) found these calculations accurate and allowed the claim. The appellate tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, confirming that the assessee had correctly set aside the amount in accordance with the provisions of the Income Tax Act. Conclusion: The appellate tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal, upholding the CIT(A)'s decisions on all four issues. The tribunal confirmed that the expenses claimed by the assessee were allowable under the Income Tax Act, based on established guidelines, legal precedents, and detailed submissions provided by the assessee.
|
