2014 (2) TMI 315 - AT - Income Tax

Disallowance of proportionate interest expenses - Held that - The advance given to Karnataka Electricity Board for electric supply, advance given for purchase of machinery and advance rent paid were for the business purpose of the assessee and no disallowance of interest in respect of such interest free business advances can legally be made - No part of interest bearing fund was utilised for giving advance to Karnataka Jewels Ltd. - The disallownace cannot be made. Employee contribution to provident fund - Held that - The assessee had made payment of employees contribution within the grace period, therefore the same are treated as paid on or before the due date as per explanation attached to section 36(1)(va) of the Act - Decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Disallowance of proportionate interest expenses on interest-free advances.
2. Delayed payment of employee contribution towards Provident Fund Account.

Issue 1: Disallowance of proportionate interest expenses on interest-free advances:
The appeal involved the Revenue challenging the deletion of additions made by the Assessing Officer on interest attributable to interest-free advances and non-payment of Employees' contribution towards PF. The AO contended that advances were not for business purposes, but the assessee demonstrated otherwise. The Coordinate Bench previously ruled in favor of the assessee in a similar case. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision based on the lack of new evidence or changes in circumstances, dismissing the Revenue's appeal against the deletion of the additions.

Issue 2: Delayed payment of employee contribution towards Provident Fund Account:
The appeal also addressed the deletion of an addition for delayed payment of employee contribution towards the PF account. The CIT(A) found that the payment was made within the grace period, treating it as paid on or before the due date as per the explanation attached to section 36(1)(va) of the Act. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision as the Revenue did not challenge this finding. Consequently, the appeal on this issue was rejected.

In conclusion, both the Revenue's appeal and the cross objection filed by the Assessee were dismissed by the Tribunal, affirming the decisions of the CIT(A) on both issues.