2015 (8) TMI 362 - AT - Income Tax

Disallowance of interest - Held that - The interest was paid by the assessee on the amount borrowed for the purposes of business so it was to be allowed u/s 36(1)(iii) of the Act and once it is established that the interest paid was for the business consideration than the deduction has to be allowed to the assessee while computing the income u/s 28 of the Act and no disallowance can be made merely on this basis that interest free advance had been given by the assessee. Moreover, the advance given in the present case was for purchase of Plant & Machinery and the partners were having interest free capital in the credit of their account. Thus the disallowance made by the AO and sustained by the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified. Accordingly the same is deleted. - Decided in favour of assessee. Disallowance of expenditure - Held that - In the present case it is noticed that the AO pointed out some discrepancies in the vouchers maintained by the assessee for various expenses and the explanation given by the assessee was not found to be plausible, therefore, the assessee itself agreed for addition of ₹ 1,00,000/- out of various expenses. In the present case since the assessee agreed for the addition, we, therefore, do not see any valid ground to interfere with the findings given by the ld. CIT(A) on this issue. Accordingly we do not see any merit in this ground of the assessee s appeal. - Decided against assessee.

Issues Involved:

1. Disallowance of interest on advance given to M/s North West Paper Crafts Pvt. Ltd.
2. Disallowance of interest expenditure under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act.
3. Disallowance of interest on loan given to Sh. Rakesh Khanna.
4. Adhoc disallowance of various expenses.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Disallowance of Interest on Advance Given to M/s North West Paper Crafts Pvt. Ltd.:

The main issue in both appeals was the disallowance of interest on an advance of Rs. 1.17 crore given to M/s North West Paper Crafts Pvt. Ltd. The Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed the interest, asserting that the advance was interest-free while the assessee incurred interest liability on borrowed funds. The AO inferred that the advance was not for business purposes, as the assessee did not provide sufficient documentary evidence. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] upheld the AO's decision, questioning the genuineness of the agreement for the purchase of plant and machinery.

However, the appellate tribunal found that the advance was indeed for business purposes, as it was given for the purchase of plant and machinery, and there was no established nexus between the borrowed funds and the advance. The tribunal noted that the partners had sufficient interest-free capital to cover the advance. Citing precedents like CIT vs. Rockman Cycle Industries Ltd. and S.A. Builders vs. CIT, the tribunal concluded that the disallowance was unjustified and deleted the addition.

2. Disallowance of Interest Expenditure under Section 40(a)(ia):

The AO disallowed Rs. 4,39,764/- paid as interest to M/s TML Financial Services Ltd., as the assessee failed to deduct tax at source. The tribunal noted that this issue was not raised before the CIT(A) and was not part of the impugned order. Therefore, the tribunal dismissed this ground of appeal.

3. Disallowance of Interest on Loan Given to Sh. Rakesh Khanna:

The AO disallowed Rs. 55,000/- as notional interest on an advance of Rs. 5,00,000/- given to Sh. Rakesh Khanna, asserting that the advance was interest-free while the assessee incurred interest on borrowed funds. The assessee claimed the advance was for purchasing land for a paper mill, but the AO found no evidence supporting this claim. The CIT(A) upheld the disallowance, citing the lack of evidence for business purposes and referencing the case of Abhishek Industries.

The tribunal, however, found the facts similar to the first issue and noted that the advance was for business purposes, with sufficient interest-free capital available. Therefore, the tribunal deleted the addition.

4. Adhoc Disallowance of Various Expenses:

The AO made an adhoc disallowance of Rs. 1,00,000/- out of various expenses, citing discrepancies in vouchers. The assessee agreed to this disallowance during the assessment proceedings. The CIT(A) upheld the disallowance, noting the assessee's agreement. The tribunal found no reason to interfere, as the disallowance was based on the assessee's own admission.

Conclusion:

The tribunal allowed the appeals partly, deleting the disallowances related to the interest on advances given to M/s North West Paper Crafts Pvt. Ltd. and Sh. Rakesh Khanna, while upholding the disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) and the adhoc disallowance of Rs. 1,00,000/- for various expenses.

← Previous Next →