2015 (9) TMI 1341 - AT - Income Tax

Disallowance of interest payment - AO making a reverse working @ 12% interest with reference to the total amount of interest - Held that - As far as the relations of M/s Chirag International Jaipur and Dr. Neelu Vashishta are concerned, the assessee s explanation is not convincing, therefore, the same cannot be considered. However, there is some force in the argument of the ld counsel that the assessee company had sufficient interest free funds available to its own. We find merit in the arguments of the ld counsel that if sufficient interest free funds are available with the assessee, then the issue of interest free advances shall be considered in the light of these facts. In view thereof, we are inclined to set aside the issue back to the file of the Assessing Officer to decide the matter afresh in accordance with law keeping in view the above observation in mind after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. - Decided in favour of assessee for statistical purposes

Issues Involved:
1. Disallowance of interest payment and addition to income.
2. Charging of interest under sections 234A and 234B.
3. Trading addition deletion based on excise duty increase.
4. Disallowance of interest on interest-free advances.

Issue 1: Disallowance of interest payment and addition to income:
The case involved cross-appeals by the assessee and the revenue against the order by the CIT(A) for A.Y. 2007-08. The assessee contested the additions and disallowances made under various sections of the Income Tax Act, seeking their deletion. Specifically, the assessee challenged the disallowance of Rs. 8,32,987 as interest payment, arguing it was contrary to the law and facts of the case. On the other hand, the revenue contended that the CIT(A) erred in deleting the trading addition of Rs. 12,77,322, attributing the fall in the gross profit rate to an increase in excise duty, a reason not raised before the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal dismissed the first ground of the assessee's appeal and proceeded to analyze the facts and arguments presented by both parties.

Issue 2: Charging of interest under sections 234A and 234B:
The Assessing Officer charged interest under sections 234A and 234B of the Income Tax Act, which the appellant denied liability for, claiming it was contrary to the law and facts of the case. The Tribunal was tasked with determining the validity of the interest charges imposed by the Assessing Officer and whether they were justified based on the provisions of the Act.

Issue 3: Trading addition deletion based on excise duty increase:
The revenue appealed the deletion of the trading addition by the CIT(A), arguing that the assessee failed to provide proper reasons for the reduced trading margins and only explained the decrease in profitability due to an increase in excise duty during the appeal stage, not before the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal deliberated on the justifiability of the relief granted by the CIT(A) and whether the assessee's delayed explanation regarding the excise duty increase warranted the deletion of the trading addition.

Issue 4: Disallowance of interest on interest-free advances:
The Assessing Officer disallowed interest to the extent of Rs. 8,32,987, alleging that the interest-free advances made by the assessee were not justified and were possibly aimed at benefiting family members and reducing tax burden. The appellant provided justifications for the interest-free advances made to specific parties, arguing that there was no nexus between the diversion of interest-bearing funds and the interest-free advances. The Tribunal examined the arguments presented by both parties and decided to send the matter back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh decision, considering the available interest-free funds with the assessee.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed both the revenue's and the assessee's appeals for statistical purposes only, emphasizing the need for a reevaluation of certain aspects of the case by the Assessing Officer to ensure a fair and accurate determination in accordance with the law.

← Previous Next →