2013 (6) TMI 718 - AT - Income Tax

Assessment made u/s 153A/143(3) - Held that - A search and seizure operation was carried out at the premises of the asessee and therefore we do not find any infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A) and dismiss this ground of appeal of the assessee. Disallowance of interest paid - Held that - Investment of 26, 26, 319/- was made at the fag end of the year and only investment of 8, 45, 313/- was made under FDR throughout the year. He therefore estimated interest expenditure of 50, 000/- on investment in FDR and allowed deduction for the same against the interest income of 1, 71, 688/- assessed by the AO. No material has been brought on record by the ld. AR of the assessee to controvert the above finding of the ld. CIT(A). No material was also brought on record by the ld. AR to show that any expenditure more than 50, 000/- was incurred by the assessee on account of interest for earning of interest income.

Summary

Issues:
1. Validity of assessment under section 153A/143(3) without search and seizure.
2. Disallowance of interest paid under section 24(b) of the Act.

Issue 1: Validity of assessment under section 153A/143(3) without search and seizure:
The appeal was filed against the order of ld. CIT(A)-Central-I, Kolkata, challenging the confirmation of the assessment made under section 153A/143(3) without any search and seizure action in the case of the assessee. The assessee argued that since there was no search and seizure involving the company, the assessment should be annulled. The AO submitted a report stating that a search and seizure operation was indeed conducted at the premises of the assessee on a specific date. The Appellate Tribunal noted that the name of the company was mentioned in the search warrant and panchnama, confirming the search and seizure. Consequently, the Tribunal found no fault in the CIT(A)'s decision and dismissed this ground of appeal.

Issue 2: Disallowance of interest paid under section 24(b) of the Act:
The second ground of appeal pertained to the disallowance of a specific amount out of interest paid by the assessee. The assessee had claimed a deduction for interest expenditure under section 24(b) of the Act related to income from house property. The AO allowed a proportionate deduction for interest payable for money borrowed for house property but disallowed a balance amount of interest expenditure. The assessee contended that the investment in FD entitled them to a higher deduction. The CIT(A) estimated the interest expenditure on the FD investment and allowed a deduction against the interest income assessed by the AO. The Tribunal, after reviewing the submissions and evidence, upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, noting the lack of evidence to challenge the estimation of interest expenditure. As a result, the ground of appeal on this issue was dismissed.

In conclusion, the appeal of the assessee was dismissed by the Appellate Tribunal, and the orders of the CIT(A) were upheld for both issues discussed in the judgment delivered on 11.6.2013.