Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (4) TMI 1235 - AT - Income TaxTreatment of income declared by the assessee during the survey proceedings u/s 133A - income from other sources OR business income claimed by the assessee - HELD THAT - In the absence of any evidence brought by the authorities below to disprove/disbelieve the claim of the assessee treating the impugned receipt under the head business income the authorities below are not justified in treating the same under the head income from other sources . D.R. could not bring before us any contrary fact or case law which may justify departure from the above finding of the Tribunal given in the case of other partner of the firm namely Mr. Hansat Maneklal Savani 2013 (12) TMI 1364 - ITAT MUMBAI . So respectfully following the same for the sake of consistency this issue is allowed in favour of the assessee and the income declared by the assessee during the course of survey is directed to be treated under the head Business income as has been claimed by the assessee. Disallowance of interest paid by the assessee to the firm in which he has been a partner - HELD THAT - The partners are entitled to interest on the credit balance in the capital account as prescribed u/s 40(b)(iv) of the I.T. Act 1961 @ 12%. The partners are also liable to pay interest on the debit balance in capital account on similar basis. It is further submitted that the liability to pay interest arises out of contractual obligation. The perusal of the copy of the Firm s assessment order for Asst. Year 2008-09 available at Paper Book Page 30 reveals that in the case of the firm M/s. MSN Enterprises the said interest has been assessed as income of the firm. Having considered the rival submissions reasoning of the lower authorities and material on record we are of the considered view that the claim of the assessee is emanating out of contractual obligation and is in consonance with the provisions of law. D.R. could not bring before us any contrary fact or case law which may justify departure from the above finding of the Tribunal given in the case of other partner of the firm namely Mr. Hansat Maneklal Savani. So respectfully following the same for the sake of consistency this issue is allowed in favour of the assessee.
|