News Update

GST - Neither SCN nor the order spell out the reasons for retrospective cancellation of registration, hence cannot be sustained: HCGST - Non-application of mind - If reply was unsatisfactory, details could have been sought - Record does not reflect that such exercise was done - Matter remitted: HCGST - Merely because a taxpayer has not filed returns for some period does not mean that registration is required to be cancelled with retrospective date also covering the period when returns were filed and taxpayer was compliant: HCGST - Petitioner's reply, although terse, is not taken into account while passing assessment orders - Petitioner put on terms, another opportunity provided: HCUnveil One Nation; One Debt Code; One Compliance Rule for Centre & StatesChina moves WTO against US tax subsidies for EVs & renewable energyMore on non-doms - The UK Spring Budget 2024 (See TII Edit)Notorious history-sheeter Mukhtar Ansari succumbs to cardiac arrest in UP jailTraining Program for Cambodian civil servants commences at MussoorieNY imposes USD 15 congestion taxCBIC revises tariff value of edible oils, gold & silver45 killed as bus races into ravine in South AfricaCBIC directs all Customs offices to remain open on Saturday & SundayBankman-Fried jailed for 25 yrs in FTX scamI-T- Once the citizen deposits the tax upon coming to know of his liability, it cannot be said that he has deliberately or willfully evaded the depositing of tax and interest in terms of Section 234A can be waived: HCHouthis attack continues in Red Sea; US military shoots down 4 dronesI-T- Secured creditor has priority charge over secured asset, over claims of I-T Department & other Departments; any excess amount recovered by Secured Creditor from auction of secured asset, over & above the dues payable to it, are to be remitted to the Departments: HCFederal Govt hands out USD 60 mn to rebuild collapsed bridge in BaltimoreI-T - Receipts of sale of scrap being part & parcel of activity and being proximate thereto would also be within ambit of gains derived from industrial undertaking for purpose of computing deduction u/s 80-IB: HCCanadian School Boards sue social media titans for 4 bn Canadian dollar in damagesI-T - Once assssee on year of reversal has paid taxes on excess provision and similar feature appeared in earlier years and assesee had payments for liquidated damages on delay of deliverables, no adverse inference can be drawn: HCFormer IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt jailed for 20 yrs for planting drugs to frame lawyerST - Software development service & IT-enabled service provided by assessee was exempt from tax during relevant period, by virtue of CBEC's Notification & Circular; demands raised for such period not sustainable: CESTATUN says Households waste across world is now at least one billion meals a dayCus - Order rejecting exporter's request for conversion of Shipping Bills on grounds that the same has been made by exporter beyond period of three months from date of Let Export Order in terms of CBEC Circular No. 36/2010-Cus : CESTATIndia, China hold fresh dialogue for complete disengagement on Western borders: MEACus - No Cess is payable when Basic Customs Duty is found to be Nil: CESTATThakur says India is prepared for 2036 OlympicsCX - As per settled law, a right acquired as result of a statutory provision, cannot be taken away retrospectively unless said statutory provision so provides or by necessary implication has such effect: CESTAT
 
I-T - Interest income earned by assessee on account of fixed deposits for maintaining infrastructural facilities is not liable to be treated as income for deduction u/s 80IA: ITAT

By TIOL News Service

NEW DELHI, JUNE 21, 2018: THE ISSUE is - Whether interest income earned by the assessee on account of fixed deposits for maintaining infrastructural facilities is liable to be treated as income for deduction u/s 80IA. NO is the answer.

Facts of the case:

The assessee company, engaged in the business of developing, maintaining and operating of infrastructure facilities. It returned income for the relevant AY. The same was selected for scrutiny. Subsequently, notices under Ss 143(2) & 142(1) along with questionnaire were issued in response to which the assessee's Chartered Accountant appeared from time to time and submitted the requisite details which were verified by the AO. During the assessment proceeding, the AO noted that the assessee had claimed deduction u/s 80-IA for profit so earned by it. The AO observed from the assessee's P&L account that the assessee had credited 'other Income'. The assessee had derived profit from the business of providing infrastructural facilities of design and construction of water treatment plant, sewage treatment plant and water supply scheme and also earned income from other sources in the form of interest & miscellaneous income.

The AO held that the interest & miscellaneous income could not be held to be derived from the business of providing infrastructural facilities as there was no direct nexus between the interest earned arid the business of providing infrastructural facilities. The AO further stated that the interest income earned on FDRs and misc. income could not be considered as profit derived from the business of developing, operating or maintaining infrastructural facilities and thereby not eligible for deduction u/s 80IA. Interest income was held to be assessable under the head 'Income from Other Sources' along with the miscellaneous income on which 80IA deduction was not eligible. Thus, the profit from developing, maintaining or operating infrastructural project which was eligible for deduction u/s 80IA, was computed and thereby reduced the claim of the assessee made u/s 80IA. On appeal, partial relief was granted by the CIT(A).

ITAT held that,

++ the basic structure of the Ss 80HH, 80IC, 80IA is in respect of exemption/benefit claimed by the assessee. The Supreme Court has taken cognizance about all the aspects regarding the interest earned on fixed deposits for the performances of bank guarantee for carrying on the business for providing performance guarantee. The Supreme Court in case of Conventional Fastners vs. CIT made it clear that interest earned on fixed deposit maintained with bank for obtaining bank guarantee is not derived from business, hence not entitle to deduction. The decision of the Apex Court is applicable in the present case which also considered the decision relied by the Counsel for the assessee i.e. Pandian Chemicals. The decision relied upon by the Counsel for the assessee are factually different and are not applicable in the present case while the decision of the Apex Court passed in the case of Conventional Fastners is more apt in the present case. Therefore, the order of the CIT(A) is set aside and appeal of the Revenue is allowed.

(See 2018-TIOL-914-ITAT-DEL)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

AR not Afar by SK Rahman

TIOL Tube Latest

Shri Shailendra Kumar, Trustee, TIOL Trust, giving welcome speech at TIOL Awards 2023




Shri M C Joshi, Former Chairman, CBDT




Address by Shri Buggana Rajendranath, Hon'ble Finance Minister of Andhra Pradesh at TIOL Awards 2023