9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Interpretation of section 24(1)(vi) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 regarding deduction of interest paid on borrowed capital for house property.
Summary: The High Court of Calcutta addressed the issue of whether unpaid sale price could be considered borrowed capital under section 24(1)(vi) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessee had borrowed Rs. 3,50,000 initially to acquire a house and later borrowed additional amounts for the unpaid purchase price. The Tribunal allowed deduction of interest paid on the initial borrowing and for the subsequent borrowing related to the unpaid purchase price, but not for interest paid to the vendor on the unpaid purchase price. The Court noted that section 24(1)(vi) allows deduction of interest on borrowed capital used for acquiring, constructing, or repairing a house property. The Tribunal's decision to allow interest on the initial borrowed amount was upheld, as it was used for acquiring the house. The Court also supported the deduction of interest on the subsequent borrowing for the unpaid purchase price, as it was directly related to the house property. The Revenue failed to provide any authority to challenge the applicability of clause (vi) of section 24(1) to the assessee's case. The Court concluded that once capital is borrowed for acquiring a house property, the interest paid on it should be deductible. Therefore, the Court ruled in favor of the assessee, affirming the Tribunal's decision to allow deductions for interest paid to the vendor company and Badridas Keshav Prosad. In conclusion, the Court held that the Tribunal did not misdirect itself in law regarding the treatment of unpaid sale price as borrowed capital under section 24(1)(vi) and justified the assessee's entitlement to deductions for interest paid on the balance purchase price and subsequent borrowings for the unpaid purchase price. Judge B. M. Mitra concurred with the judgment.
|
