2015 (8) TMI 766 - HC - Income Tax

Disallowance of interest - whether alleged advances made by Appellant was in the course of and for the purpose of business especially when Appellant had adequate non-interest bearing funds during the relevant assessment years? - Held that - From the material placed on record, it is not in dispute that the assessee advanced money to the ladies out of interest bearing funds. The case of the assessee is that those ladies were expected to enter into an agreement to purchase the land properties for the benefit of it. In fact that has been done, but no material is placed on record to show that the ladies entered into an agreement to purchase the lands as mentioned in the letter which they have given in those circumstances. The case of the assessee is not established and once the amounts were advanced to these ladies not in the course of business, the assessee was not entitled to claim any deduction of interest paid on the amount borrowed. That is precisely what the Tribunal has held and what the authorities have upheld. - Decided in favour of revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Deduction of interest on funds given without interest and for non-business purposes.
2. Consideration of interest-bearing funds for advancing alleged amounts.
3. Disallowance of interest when advances made in the course of and for the purpose of business.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Deduction of interest on funds given without interest and for non-business purposes
The assessee, a partnership firm engaged in real estate business, claimed deduction of interest expenditure on funds paid to individuals during the assessment year. The assessing authority rejected the claim, stating the payments were not for business purposes and lacked evidence to support the claim. The Appellate Commissioner initially allowed the appeal, but the Tribunal overturned the decision, emphasizing that the advances were made without interest from interest-bearing funds and not for business purposes. The High Court concurred with the Tribunal's decision, stating that the assessee failed to establish the loans were for business purposes, hence dismissing the appeal.

Issue 2: Consideration of interest-bearing funds for advancing alleged amounts
The Tribunal remanded the case back to consider the availability of interest-bearing funds with the assessee for advancing the alleged amounts. Upon reevaluation, the Tribunal found that the advances were made without interest from interest-bearing funds, leading to disallowance of the interest deduction claimed by the assessee. The High Court upheld this decision, emphasizing the lack of evidence to support the business purpose of the advances.

Issue 3: Disallowance of interest when advances made in the course of and for the purpose of business
The substantial question of law framed was whether the disallowance of interest was justified when the advances were made in the course of and for the purpose of business, especially when the appellant had adequate non-interest-bearing funds. The High Court observed that the assessee failed to prove that the advances were made for business purposes, as the individuals who received the funds did not enter into agreements to purchase land properties as claimed. Consequently, the Court ruled in favor of the revenue, dismissing the appeals and upholding the disallowance of interest deduction.

In conclusion, the High Court affirmed the Tribunal's decision to disallow the interest deduction claimed by the assessee, emphasizing the lack of evidence to support the business purpose of the advances made from interest-bearing funds to individuals.