9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2011 (9) TMI 538 - AT - Income TaxReopening of assessment u/s 147 - reason to believe - Held That - Where Assessee made a wrong claim of payment housing loan interest paid to ICICI Bank as allowable u/s 57(iii) of the Act. Accordingly, we hold that the assessing officer is justified in issuing the notice for reopening of the assessment. Housing loan from ICICI Bank - Utilized by giving loan to M/s Laxi Ganapathi Paper Mills - Deduction of Interest claimed - Housing loan deduction could have been claimed under Sec 24 assessee claimed under Sec 57 - Held That - Assessee not entitled for deduction u/s 57(iii) of the Act. Interest on borrowing was not allowable as deduction from interest income derived from loan given to company as interest paid had no nexus with interest earned in as much as expenditure by way of interest could not be said to have been expended wholly and exclusively for earning income by way of interest from loan.Reliance placed on Karnataka Forest Plantations Corporation Ltd., Vs. CIT (1985 - TMI - 27135 - KARNATAKA High Court) Assessment on a issue not mentioned in notice issued under 148 - Gifts from NRI relatives as income of assessee - Held That - In view of the explanation 3 to section proviso to section 147, the assessment of gift as income of the assessee under section 56(1) (V) is justified.
Issues Involved:
1. Reopening of assessment under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act. 2. Disallowance of interest paid on ICICI Home Loan. 3. Addition of foreign gift as income of the assessee. Detailed Analysis: 1. Reopening of Assessment under Section 147: The assessee filed a return of income for the assessment year 2005-06 on 30.07.2005, declaring an income of Rs. 3,58,220/-. This return was processed under Section 143(1) on 24.11.2005. Subsequently, a notice under Section 148 was issued on 27.03.2007 to reopen the assessment. The reasons for reopening were based on the observation that the assessee had a housing loan of Rs. 62,49,056/- with ICICI Bank and had shown an equivalent amount as a loan given to M/s Lakshmi Ganapathi Paper Mills Ltd. The interest paid on the ICICI loan was set off against the interest received from the paper mill, which was deemed incorrect under Section 24(iv) of the IT Act. The assessee argued that there was no reason to believe that income had escaped assessment and that the reopening was based on a misapplication of Section 24(1)(v). The departmental representative contended that the reopening was justified as the assessee made a wrong claim under Section 57(iii). The Tribunal held that the assessing officer had reason to believe that income had escaped assessment, thereby justifying the reopening under Section 147. 2. Disallowance of Interest Paid on ICICI Home Loan: The assessee, who is the Managing Director of M/s Lakshmi Ganapathi Paper Mills Ltd., took a housing loan from ICICI Bank but did not use it for constructing a house. Instead, the loan was given to the paper mill, and the interest received was offered to tax under 'income from other sources.' The assessee claimed the interest paid on the ICICI loan as a deduction under Section 57(iii). The Tribunal noted that the loan was initially taken for the construction of a house, and since the house was not constructed, the deduction could not be claimed under Section 24. Furthermore, the interest paid on the loan could not be allowed under Section 57(iii) as it did not have a direct nexus with the interest earned from the loan given to the company. The Tribunal relied on several judgments, including Karnataka Forest Plantations Corporation Ltd. Vs. CIT and CIT Vs. Dr. V. Gopinathan, to conclude that the interest on the borrowing was not deductible from the interest income derived from the loan given to the company. 3. Addition of Foreign Gift as Income of the Assessee: The assessee received a foreign gift of Rs. 6,31,473/- from NRI relatives, which was treated as income by the assessing officer under Section 56(1)(v) due to the lack of confirmation letters and other evidence from the donors. The assessee argued that the assessing officer did not have the jurisdiction to assess this amount under Section 147 without a specific finding of escapement of income. The Tribunal held that under Section 147, the assessing officer could assess any other income that escaped assessment which comes to his notice during the proceedings. Since the assessment of income concerning the interest payment to ICICI Bank was treated as escaped assessment, the assessing officer was justified in assessing the foreign gift as income. The assessee failed to prove the genuineness and creditworthiness of the gift, leading to the confirmation of the addition by the Tribunal. Conclusion: The Tribunal dismissed the appeal of the assessee, confirming the reopening of the assessment under Section 147, the disallowance of the interest paid on the ICICI Home Loan, and the addition of the foreign gift as income. The order was pronounced in the open court on 23.09.2011.
|
