9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (8) TMI 16 - HC - Income TaxDeduction on account of payment of interest on interest - whether was allowable under section 36(i)(iii) and Section 37(1)? - Held that - In the present case, there is an additional feature that assessee failed to explain the amount which was claimed to be deducted under section 36(1)(iii) of the Act. It was found that the entire capital was paid and what was remaining in the account was interest on which the interest was shown and which was sought to be deducted. The AO was not satisfied with the genuineness of the entry. He observed that since the interest amounting to ₹ 1,49,85/- has already been disallowed on ingenuine credits, the balance amount was also disallowed. He had rightly relied on the judgment of Supreme Court in Shew Kissen Bhatter V/s Commissioner of Income Tax, West Bengal (1973 (3) TMI 2 - SUPREME Court) and Jaswantrai P.Mehta V/s Commissioner of Income-tax (1991 (6) TMI 62 - GUJARAT High Court ). - Decided in favour of revenue.
Issues:
1. Service of summons on the respondent 2. Allowability of deduction on interest on interest under Section 36(1)(iii) and Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 Analysis: 1. Service of Summons on the Respondent: The High Court addressed the issue of service of summons on the respondent. The appeal had been admitted but could not be listed initially due to insufficient service on the respondent. The Department applied for and carried out publication of a notice in a widely circulated newspaper in Rajasthan, the Rajasthan Patrika. The Court found the service to be satisfactory, allowing them to proceed with hearing the matter. 2. Allowability of Deduction on Interest on Interest: The core issue in this case revolved around the deduction claimed by the assessee on interest on interest under Section 36(1)(iii) and Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer disallowed the claim, stating that the interest liability claimed was wholly referable to interest on interest. The Appellate Authority partly allowed the appeal, emphasizing that the provisions of Section 36(1)(iii) and Section 37(1) entitled the deduction. The ITAT dismissed the appeal, highlighting that the interest on interest was allowable as the borrowed funds were utilized for business purposes. However, the High Court disagreed with the ITAT's reasoning. 3. Judicial Precedents and Interpretations: The judgment referred to various legal precedents to analyze the issue of interest on interest. The Supreme Court's decision in Shew Kissen Bhatter v. Commissioner of Income Tax, West Bengal, emphasized the distinction between compound interest and simple interest, stating that interest on interest is not deductible under the law. The Gujarat High Court and Bombay High Court also provided insights on the allowability of interest on interest under different sections of the Income Tax Act. 4. Court's Decision and Rationale: The High Court concluded that the deduction claimed by the assessee on interest on interest was not permissible under Section 36(1)(iii) of the Act. The Court emphasized that only the interest on money borrowed, genuinely regarded as interest, could be claimed as a deduction. Interest on interest, being a result of default or penalty, was not deductible. The Court found that the Appellate Authority and the ITAT had not provided sufficient reasons to support the allowance of the deduction. Additionally, the Court highlighted the failure of the assessee to explain the claimed deduction adequately, leading to the disallowance of the deduction by the Assessing Officer. 5. Final Verdict: In light of the detailed analysis and legal interpretations, the Court ruled in favor of the Department and against the assessee. The Department was directed to proceed accordingly based on the judgment.
|
