2021 (1) TMI 906 - AT - Income Tax

Addition on account of own money received on the basis of information received from the Central Excise Department - addition duty determined by Central Excise Department has been confirmed by the CESTAT New Delhi - CIT-A deleted the addition - HELD THAT - CIT(A) has duly considered the directions of the Coordinate Bench in the first round the findings of the CESTAT as limited to a specified period and not pertaining to period under consideration confirmation from Central Excise department that there is no material or evidence for undervaluation for period under consideration and the fact that the AO has merely relied on past years findings and in absence of any material or evidence and only on presumptions conjectures and surmises has made the additions. The Revenue has failed to controvert the said findings of the ld CIT(A) before us. We therefore affirm the findings of the ld CIT(A) wherein he has rightly deleted the addition Interest received on margin money at lower rate than it had to pay the borrowers - HELD THAT - In the first round the Tribunal has set-aside the matter to the file of the AO to examine the contention of the assessee that there is no fresh ICD placed during the period under consideration and where the same is found to be correct allow the relief to the assessee following the Tribunal s order for assessment year 1996-97 wherein similar addition was deleted. During the set-aside proceedings we find that the assessee has submitted the details which show that there is no increase in Unsecured Loans and Inter-Corporate Deposits during the period under consideration. Therefore following the earlier decision the matter is decided in favour of the assessee . We find that the Tribunal decision for A.Y 1996-97 has since been confirmed by the Hon ble Rajasthan 2017 (11) TMI 1673 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT - In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

Summary

Issues Involved:

1. Deletion of addition of ?4,24,27,000/- on account of own money received based on information from the Central Excise Department.
2. Deletion of addition of ?25,00,000/- on account of interest received on margin money at a lower rate than it had to pay the borrowers.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Deletion of Addition of ?4,24,27,000/- on Account of Own Money:

The Revenue challenged the deletion of ?4,24,27,000/- made on account of own money received based on information from the Central Excise Department. The initial addition was made during the assessment year 1998-99 due to cash premium received out of the books of accounts. The matter was previously set aside by the ITAT for fresh consideration based on the outcome of the CESTAT order. The CESTAT confirmed the duty demand for the period April 1995 to August 1996, but not for the period relevant to the assessment year 1998-99.

The CIT(A) found that the CESTAT order did not cover the period relevant to the assessment year 1998-99. Additionally, the Central Excise Department confirmed that there was no undervaluation case against the assessee for the financial year 1997-98. The AO's addition was based on presumptions without any concrete evidence for the period under consideration. The CIT(A) deleted the addition, and the ITAT affirmed this decision, noting that the Revenue failed to provide any contrary evidence.

2. Deletion of Addition of ?25,00,000/- on Account of Interest:

The Revenue contested the deletion of ?25,00,000/- added due to interest received on margin money at a lower rate than the interest paid to borrowers. The ITAT had previously set aside this issue for fresh consideration, directing the AO to verify the assessee's claim that no fresh ICD (Inter-Corporate Deposit) was placed during the period under consideration.

During the set-aside proceedings, the assessee provided details showing no increase in unsecured loans and ICDs during the relevant period. The CIT(A) deleted the addition, stating that the AO's decision was based on the pending appeal in a higher court without considering the factual correctness of the assessee's claims. The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, noting that the Tribunal's order for the assessment year 1996-97, which deleted a similar addition, had since been confirmed by the Rajasthan High Court.

Conclusion:

The ITAT dismissed the Revenue's appeal, affirming the CIT(A)'s deletion of both additions. The Tribunal found that the Revenue failed to provide any new evidence or material to justify the additions, and the decisions were based on proper verification and adherence to legal precedents. The appeal was dismissed in its entirety.