9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Addition of Rs. 5,47,068 out of interest paid to persons specified under section 40A(2)(b) of the Income-tax Act. 2. Addition of Rs. 3 lakhs made by the Assessing Officer on account of subscription fee paid to a national sports club. Issue-wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Addition of Rs. 5,47,068 out of Interest Paid: The assessee-firm, engaged in the business of reselling minerals and commission agents, filed a return of income declaring Rs. 21,87,813, which was scrutinized and determined at Rs. 30,26,900. The first issue pertains to the confirmation of an addition of Rs. 4,57,068 disallowed by the Assessing Officer under section 40A(2)(b) of the Income-tax Act. The Assessing Officer disallowed the interest paid on borrowed funds to specified persons, restricting the claim to 12% per annum instead of the paid 18.95%, citing that the rate was excessive. The assessee argued that the interest rates on secured and unsecured loans could go up to 21%, making the loans from specified persons commercially prudent. The assessee also contended that the interest claims were accepted in previous years, and the urgency of the funds justified the higher rate. The CIT(A) confirmed the disallowance, stating that the need for funds was not established with facts and figures. The Tribunal examined the provisions of section 40A(2)(a), emphasizing that the expenditure should not be excessive or unreasonable concerning the fair market value, legitimate business needs, or benefits derived. The Tribunal noted that the assessee failed to demonstrate the legitimate need for the higher interest rate and did not provide comparable cases where interest rates exceeded 12%. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s order, dismissing the assessee's ground. 2. Addition of Rs. 3 Lakhs for Subscription Fee to National Sports Club: The second issue involves the allowability of a subscription fee of Rs. 3 lakhs paid to the National Sports Club of India (NSCI) in the name of a working partner. The Assessing Officer disallowed the claim, stating that the fee was a personal expenditure and not for business purposes. The assessee argued that the subscription was for business purposes, relying on various judgments that allowed club membership fees as revenue expenditure. The CIT(A) confirmed the disallowance, distinguishing between corporate memberships and those held by partners in a firm. The CIT(A) noted that the membership did not lead to an increase in turnover or new customers, indicating personal use. The Tribunal examined the facts and concluded that the subscription fee was wholly and exclusively for business purposes. It noted that the membership was used for business purposes in subsequent years and that the expenditure was incurred by the firm. The Tribunal rejected the revenue's objections, stating that the commercial angle was established, and the name on the membership was not a determining factor. The Tribunal allowed the assessee's ground, reversing the CIT(A)'s order. Conclusion: The Tribunal dismissed the first ground regarding the addition of interest paid, upholding the CIT(A)'s order. However, it allowed the second ground concerning the subscription fee, reversing the CIT(A)'s decision and holding that the expenditure was for business purposes. The appeal was partly allowed.
|
