9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (7) TMI 975 - AT - Income TaxDisallowance on interest expenditure - Suffiecny of own funds - HELD THAT - It is now well settled proposition of law that the interest disallowance is not called for when the own funds available with the assessee is more than the amount of interest free advance given. In the instant case, we have already seen that the own funds available with the assessee is in excess of the value of the amount of investment and interest free loan. Hence, the tax authorities are not justified in disallowing the interest claim made by the assessee. Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by Ld. CIT(A) on this issue and direct the A.O. to delete the disallowance.
Issues:
Challenge to disallowance of interest expenditure by the Assessing Officer. Analysis: The appellant challenged the order of the Ld. CIT(A) confirming the disallowance of interest expenditure amounting to ?54,32,211 made by the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer proposed the disallowance as he observed that the appellant had made investments and given interest-free loans without charging any interest. The Assessing Officer calculated interest @ 12.5% on the investment and loan amount, resulting in a disallowance of ?71,42,730. However, the disallowance was restricted to ?54,32,211 as claimed by the appellant. The Ld. CIT(A) upheld this decision, leading to the appeal. The appellant argued that no disallowance of interest was justified as the own funds available with the appellant exceeded the value of the investment and loan given interest-free. The appellant pointed out that the balance sheet showed interest-free funds of ?9.78 crores at the beginning and ?10.02 crores at the end of the year, while the total investment and loan amount was ?5.71 crores, demonstrating an excess of own funds over the value of investment and loan. The appellant referred to a decision by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court and the Hon'ble Bombay High Court, which held that interest disallowance is not warranted when the assessee has sufficient own funds covering loans and advances. The appellant highlighted the view expressed by the Bombay High Court regarding the presumption that investments were made from interest-free funds available with the assessee. This view was subsequently upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Considering the appellant's arguments and the established legal principles, the Tribunal concluded that the interest disallowance was unwarranted as the own funds available with the appellant exceeded the value of the investment and interest-free loan. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the Ld. CIT(A)'s order and directed the Assessing Officer to delete the disallowance. The Tribunal also noted that addressing the existence of commercial expediency in making the investment and giving the loan was unnecessary, given the deletion of the disallowance. In conclusion, the appeal filed by the appellant was allowed, and the order was pronounced in the open court on 28th June 2021.
|
