9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (7) TMI 466 - AT - Income TaxInterest expenditure Held that - The decision in Eminent Holdings Pvt. Ltd. 2014 (7) TMI 2 - ITAT MUMBAI and Hitesh S. Mehta Versus DCIT Central Circle- 23, Mumbai 2013 (10) TMI 1065 - ITAT MUMBAI - books of accounts produced by the assessee during the assessment proceedings has been held to be unreliable - rejection/ reliability of the books of accounts and the proposed adjudication of the CIT(A) in view of the direction may have direct impact on the issue of the liability the matter is liable to be remitted back to the AO for fresh adjudication Decided partly in favour of Assessee. Levy of interest u/s 234 of the Act Held that - The decision in The Commissioner of Income Tax Versus Divine Holdings Pvt. Ltd. 2012 (4) TMI 100 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT followed - provisions of section 234A, 234B and 234C were applicable to the notified person also - provisions of section 234 of the Act are applicable - as far as calculation part is concerned, there was merit in the submission made by the assessee thus, the matter is remitted back to the AO for fresh adjudication Decided partly in favour of Assessee.
Issues involved:
1. Appeal against orders of Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) for AY. 2002-03 and AY. 2006-07. 2. Disallowance of interest expenditure. 3. Charging of interest under sections 234A, 234B, and 234C of the Act. 4. Calculation of book profit under section 115JB of the Act. Issue 1: Appeal against orders of Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) for AY. 2002-03 and AY. 2006-07: The assessee, a company engaged in trading and investing in securities, challenged the orders passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) for AY. 2002-03 and AY. 2006-07. The AO had determined the income of the assessee, making certain additions during the assessment proceedings. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) was approached by the assessee against the AO's order. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee included issues related to the determination of income, disallowance of interest expenditure, and charging of interest under various sections of the Act. The Tribunal remanded the matter back to the file of the FAA for fresh adjudication on certain grounds, considering the inter-connected nature of the issues raised by the assessee. Issue 2: Disallowance of interest expenditure: The Tribunal considered the disallowance of interest expenditure of a specific amount. The Tribunal referred to a previous case where a similar issue was raised and decided. After hearing both parties, the Tribunal decided to set aside the matter to the file of the FAA for fresh adjudication. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of considering the rejection of books of accounts in relation to interest liabilities, as the books of account form the basis for computing book profits under the Act. The Tribunal directed the FAA to provide a reasonable opportunity for the assessee to present their case, following a similar decision made in a previous case. Issue 3: Charging of interest under sections 234A, 234B, and 234C of the Act: The assessee contested the levy of interest under sections 234A, 234B, and 234C of the Act. The Tribunal referred to a judgment by the Bombay High Court, which held that these provisions were applicable to notified entities. While upholding the applicability of these provisions, the Tribunal decided to remand the issue back to the AO for fresh adjudication. The AO was directed to consider the tax deductible at source on the income assessed and provide a reasonable opportunity for the assessee to be heard. The Tribunal partially allowed this ground in favor of the assessee. Issue 4: Calculation of book profit under section 115JB of the Act: The Tribunal addressed the calculation of book profit under section 115JB of the Act. The assessee raised a ground related to this calculation, which was considered consequential to another ground regarding interest expenditure. The Tribunal decided to restore this issue back to the file of the FAA for fresh adjudication, following a similar decision made for a previous year. The FAA was instructed to afford a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. This ground was allowed for statistical purposes. In conclusion, the Tribunal partly allowed the appeals filed by the assessee for the relevant assessment years, remanding certain issues back to the respective authorities for fresh adjudication and providing opportunities for the assessee to present their case effectively.
|
