Facts of the Case
The assessee, engaged in construction and sale of commercial
properties, developed a multi-storey commercial complex and followed the Completed
Contract Method (CCM) for accounting.
Due to a change in usage approval by NDMC, certain allottees
refused to take possession of allotted commercial spaces. The assessee:
- Refunded
advances to such allottees
- Paid
additional compensation for surrender of rights
The assessee treated such compensation as revenue
expenditure in its Profit & Loss Account.
The Assessing Officer (AO):
- Treated
the payment as capital expenditure (repurchase of flats)
- Disallowed
deduction
The CIT(A) allowed the claim, but the ITAT initially reversed it for AY 1995-96, leading to multiple appeals.
Issues Involved
- Whether
compensation paid for surrender of booking rights is revenue
expenditure or capital expenditure.
- Whether
such compensation can be added to stock valuation.
- Whether
rental income from unsold flats (stock-in-trade) is taxable as:
- Business
Income, or
- Income from House Property.
Petitioner’s Arguments (Revenue)
- Compensation
amounted to repurchase of property, hence capital in nature.
- Payments
were not contractually required and were for extraneous considerations.
- Since
recipients treated it as capital gains, it should be capital expenditure
for the assessee.
- Rental income from stock-in-trade should be treated as business income.
Respondent’s Arguments (Assessee)
- Unsold
units were stock-in-trade, hence related expenditure is revenue in
nature.
- Compensation
was paid due to commercial expediency to avoid disputes and
maintain goodwill.
- Under
CCM, revenue is recognized only upon completion; hence accounting
treatment must be respected.
- Compensation
is not part of cost of inventory under AS-2.
- Rental income should be taxed as Income from House Property.
Court Findings / Judgment
The Delhi High Court held:
1. Compensation is Revenue Expenditure
- Flats
constituted stock-in-trade, not capital assets.
- Payment
was made for commercial expediency and business interests.
- It
was not a repurchase but settlement of rights before transfer of
ownership.
- Even
without contractual obligation, expenditure can be allowed if commercially
justified.
Therefore, compensation is allowable as business expenditure.
2. Not Part of Stock Valuation
- As
per AS-2, only costs bringing inventory to present condition are
includible.
- Compensation paid after completion is an extraordinary expense, not inventory cost.
3. Rental Income = Income from House Property
- Consistent
judicial view accepted in earlier years.
- Rule
of consistency applied.
- Rental income from stock-in-trade is taxable under Income from House Property.
Important Clarifications
- Commercial
expediency does not require contractual obligation.
- Treatment
in recipient’s hands (capital gains) is irrelevant for payer’s
deduction.
- Accounting
method (CCM) consistently followed cannot be ignored by Revenue.
- Revenue cannot take inconsistent positions across assessment years.
Court Order
- Appeals
of Revenue dismissed
- Appeals
of Assessee allowed
- ITAT
findings (against assessee) set aside
- Compensation
allowed as revenue expenditure
Sections Involved
- Section
260A – Appeal to High Court
- Section
37(1) – Business Expenditure
- Section
24 – Income from House Property
- Accounting
Standard (AS) 7 – Construction Contracts
- Accounting Standard (AS) 2 – Valuation of Inventories
Link to download the order -
https://delhihighcourt.nic.in/app/case_number_pdf/2019:DHC:1676-DB/SMD20032019ITA5482010.pdf
Disclaimer
This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment