2009 (12) TMI 986 - AT - Income Tax

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Deduction u/s 80IB for interest income and surrendered income.
2. Netting of interest for computing deduction u/s 80IB.
3. Low household withdrawals.
4. Disallowance of car expenses.
5. Addition u/s 40A(2)(b) for interest paid to related parties.

Summary:

1. Deduction u/s 80IB for interest income and surrendered income:
The assessee's appeal in I.T.A.No. 757/Ind/2006 was primarily concerned with the disallowance of deduction u/s 80IB for interest income and income surrendered during a survey. The A.O. disallowed the deduction, arguing that the excess stock of Kapas was unaccounted and not derived from the industrial undertaking. The Ld. CIT(A) upheld this decision, stating that the surrendered income could not be conclusively linked to the industrial undertaking. The Tribunal agreed with the Revenue Authorities, noting that the assessee was also involved in trading activities and could not prove the source of investment in the excess stock as derived from the industrial undertaking. Thus, the claim for deduction u/s 80IB was dismissed.

2. Netting of interest for computing deduction u/s 80IB:
The assessee contended that interest income should be netted against interest expenses for computing deduction u/s 80IB. The Tribunal restored this issue to the A.O. to examine the nexus between the interest paid and earned. If the nexus is established, only the net interest should be excluded from the eligible profits of the industrial undertaking. This issue was similarly addressed in I.T.A.No. 756/Ind/2009 and other related appeals, with the Tribunal directing the A.O. to re-examine the nexus.

3. Low household withdrawals:
In I.T.A.No. 756/Ind/2009, the assessee challenged the addition made for low household withdrawals. The A.O. had added Rs. 1,05,000/- based on the assumption that Rs. 10,000/- per month was reasonable for household expenses. The Tribunal found that in similar cases, withdrawals of Rs. 61,000/- were deemed sufficient. Therefore, the Tribunal held that the assessee's withdrawals of Rs. 86,000/- were adequate and deleted the addition.

4. Disallowance of car expenses:
The assessee appealed against the disallowance of 25% of car expenses. The Tribunal found that a disallowance rate of 20% was more reasonable given the facts of the case. Thus, the disallowance was partly allowed, reducing it to 20%.

5. Addition u/s 40A(2)(b) for interest paid to related parties:
The assessee contested the addition of Rs. 33,673/- made by the A.O. for paying higher interest rates to related parties compared to unrelated parties. The Tribunal upheld the Ld. CIT(A)'s decision, noting that the assessee failed to justify the difference in interest rates. Therefore, the addition was confirmed.

Conclusion:
All the appeals were partly allowed, with specific directions for re-examination of certain issues by the A.O. and adjustments to disallowances as deemed reasonable by the Tribunal. The order was pronounced in the open court on 15th December, 2009.