9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (4) TMI 374 - AT - Income TaxInterest free loans to its subsidiaries - no commercial expediency involved - Whether AO was right in making disallowance of interest by taking the rate of interest as 12% per annum? - Principle of consistency - HELD THAT - When the Revenue has allowed claim of the assessee during the preceding three assessment years considering the fact of commercial expediency, then, the ld.CIT(A) cannot be held as unreasonable and unjustified in following the orders of his predecessors. It is a peculiar factual position of present AY 2015-16 that the assessee, in fact, not claimed any expenditure on interest except interest on car loan. Therefore, being unable to see any valid reason to interfere with the findings arrived at by the ld.CIT(A), we uphold the same. Accordingly, ground No.1 of the Revenue is dismissed. Disallowance u/s 14A of the IT Act r.w.r. 8D - assessee submitted that undisputedly, no exempt income has been earned by the assessee during the year under consideration, therefore, no addition could have been made in the hands of the assessee u/s 14A of the Act r.w.r 8D as relying on Cheminvest Ltd. 2015 (9) TMI 238 - DELHI HIGH COURT and Crystal Crop Protection Pvt. Ltd. 2022 (7) TMI 1162 - DELHI HIGH COURT - HELD THAT - AO has made disallowance solely relying on CBDT Circular No.05/2017 dated 11.02.2014. The Hon ble jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in the case of PCIT vs. IL FS Energy Development Company Ltd. 2017 (8) TMI 732 - DELHI HIGH COURT held that the court is not persuaded that in view of the Circular of the CBDT dated 11.02.2014, the decision of Cheminvest Ltd. 2015 (9) TMI 238 - DELHI HIGH COURT requires reconsideration. Therefore, being unable to see any ambiguity, perversity or any other valid reason to interfere with the findings of the ld. CIT(A), we uphold the same. Appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed.
Issues Involved:
The issues involved in the judgment are: 1. Whether interest-free loans granted to subsidiaries without commercial expediency can be disallowed under section 36(1)(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 2. Whether the addition made under section 14A of the IT Act, 1961 can be deleted when no exempt income was earned during the assessment year. Issue 1: Interest-free loans to subsidiaries: The Revenue contended that interest-free funds granted to subsidiaries without commercial expediency violated section 36(1)(iii) of the Income-tax Act. The AO disallowed interest at 12% per annum. However, the Assessee argued that no interest expenditure was claimed except for a small amount on a car loan. The CIT(A) granted relief based on the purpose of the loans for business expansion and commercial expediency, citing precedents from earlier assessment years and Supreme Court judgments. The Assessee's disallowance u/s 43B of the Act supported this position. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, noting the absence of any valid reason to interfere. Issue 2: Disallowance under section 14A: The Revenue sought to reinstate the AO's disallowance under section 14A of the IT Act, which was deleted by the CIT(A). The Assessee argued that no exempt income was earned during the year, thus no addition should be made under section 14A. The Assessee relied on various judgments, including those of the jurisdictional High Court of Delhi. The Tribunal observed that the AO's disallowance was based solely on a CBDT Circular, while the High Court's previous decisions did not require reconsideration. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition under section 14A. Conclusion: The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, upholding the CIT(A)'s orders on both issues. The judgment was pronounced on 17.03.2023.
|
