2015 (9) TMI 1346 - AT - Income Tax

Diversion of interest bearing funds towards non-business purposes - assessee has advanced interest-free funds to related concerns - Held that - None of the discussion in the orders of AO or CIT(A) makes a reference to any nexus between the interest bearing funds and the impugned interest free advance made to the sister concerns . Moreover, the assessee has pointed out that it has enough interest free funds to cover the impugned interest free advance made to the sister concerns, and therefore, under these circumstances the ratio of the judgment of the Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of Reliance Utilities & power Ltd. (2009 (1) TMI 4 - HIGH COURT BOMBAY ) clearly supports the plea of the assessee for deletion of the disallowance out of interest expenditure. The precedents in the assessee s own case also support the stand of the assessee, therefore, we do not find any merit in sustaining the disallowance of ₹ 2,32,590/- The same is directed to be deleted. - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Validity of proceedings initiated under sections 147/148 for reopening the assessment.
2. Disallowance of deduction under section 80HHC.
3. Disallowance of interest on interest-free funds advanced to related parties.

Analysis:

Issue 1:
The appellant, a partnership firm engaged in manufacturing and sale of apparels, challenged the initiation of proceedings under sections 147/148 due to the reopening of assessment by the Assessing Officer. The original return declared income with a claim of deduction under section 80HHC. The Assessing Officer reopened the assessment on the ground of escaped income. The CIT(A) partially allowed relief but affirmed the reopening. The appellant contended that the reasons recorded were factually incorrect regarding the deduction under section 80HHC. The appellant provided evidence showing positive profits even after considering trading goods losses. The Tribunal agreed with the appellant, finding the reasons unfounded and ordered cancellation of the reopening.

Issue 2:
Regarding the disallowance of deduction under section 80HHC, the Assessing Officer disallowed the deduction, citing profits from export incentives not being considered as profits derived from export. The appellant argued that even with trading goods losses, they were entitled to the deduction as per the law. The Tribunal found in favor of the appellant, stating that the reasons for disallowance were factually incorrect and unsustainable.

Issue 3:
The disallowance of interest on interest-free funds advanced to related parties was also contested. The Assessing Officer disallowed the interest, alleging diversion of interest-bearing funds for non-business purposes. The appellant argued that they had enough interest-free funds to cover the advances and cited precedents where similar disallowances were deleted. The Tribunal agreed with the appellant, noting the lack of nexus between the funds and the advances and directed the deletion of the disallowance.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal by the assessee, emphasizing the factual inaccuracies in the reasons recorded for reopening and supporting the appellant's contentions regarding deductions and interest disallowances.