9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
- Disallowance of interest as revenue expenditure - Interpretation of the agreement with M/s Peirce Leslie Co. Ltd. - Assessment of interest payment for delayed purchase consideration - Classification of interest payment as revenue expenditure Analysis: 1. The appeal pertains to the disallowance of interest amounting to Rs. 3,42,351 claimed by the assessee. The agreement with M/s Peirce Leslie Co. Ltd. stipulated an interest payment of 18% per annum if the purchase price for the land and buildings was not paid within the specified time. The dispute arose when the revenue authorities disallowed the interest payment as a revenue expenditure, deeming it to be in the capital field only. 2. The CIT(A) held that the assessee's intention was to engage in an adventure in the nature of trade. It was noted that the assessee retained only a portion of the land, with the remainder being purchased by sister concerns. Consequently, the CIT(A) allowed only the interest referable to the land retained by the assessee, denying the deduction for the portion related to lands sold to sister concerns. The assessee appealed this decision seeking further relief. 3. Upon hearing the rival submissions, the Tribunal examined the details of the property transactions involving the sale deeds to various entities and the agreement with M/s Peirce Leslie Co. Ltd. It was observed that while the vendor was obligated to transfer the property to the appellant or its nominees, the assessee had purchased only a fraction of the land, with the rest being directly sold to sister concerns. The Tribunal disagreed with the CIT(A)'s characterization of the assessee as a mere intermediary, highlighting the active involvement of the assessee in demolishing structures, selling scrap materials, and earning business income. The Tribunal concluded that the interest payment of Rs. 4 lakhs was a contractual obligation essential for protecting the assessee's interests, especially in the context of the business activities undertaken. 4. Ultimately, the Tribunal upheld the claim of the assessee for the deduction of interest, considering it as an expenditure under section 37 of the Income Tax Act. The decision favored the assessee, allowing the appeal and recognizing the interest payment as a legitimate business expense incurred in the course of the trade venture. This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key issues, arguments presented, and the Tribunal's rationale in resolving the dispute over the disallowance of interest as a revenue expenditure.
|
