2012 (7) TMI 765 - AT - Income Tax

Disallowance out of interest expenses - The assessee had voluntarily disallowed interest of Rs.2,52,278/- u/s. 14A - Held that - Disallowance that the assessee could not make out a case that there was any commercial expediency to take the loan at higher rate @ 12% and giving loan @ 9% CIT(A) had not examined whether the advances given by the assessee were out of interest free fund or from the interest bearing borrowed capital - as the assessee has demonstrated that the advances were out of interest free funds available with him no addition was called for in respect of the advances given to Shri Boney N Dalal and Niranjan V Dalal. In respect of Mohit Overseas (P) Ltd. that the assessee had been giving as well as taking loan from the said party and interest was being paid and charged at the same rate, therefore we find force into the contention of the assessee that such transactions were for business purposes. In view of this, no addition was called for - in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Disallowance of interest expenses by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-I, Surat.
2. Appeal filed by the assessee against the assessment order for the year 2007-08.
3. Disallowance of interest expenses on interest-free advances.
4. Disallowance of interest expenses on loans given at different interest rates.
5. Disallowance of interest expenses under section 14A of the Act.

Analysis:

1. The appeal was against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-I, Surat, regarding the disallowance of interest expenses of Rs.1,79,207 by the assessee for the assessment year 2007-08.

2. The Assessing Officer observed that the assessee had received interest @ 9% p.a but paid interest @ 12%. The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal after considering the submissions of the assessee.

3. The assessee contended that interest-free advances were given out of sufficient interest-free funds, citing relevant case laws. The AO disallowed interest expenses on such advances, but the Tribunal found that the advances were indeed made from interest-free funds like share capital reserves and unsecured loans.

4. Regarding loans given at different interest rates, the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the disallowance of interest exceeding 9% on the grounds of lack of commercial expediency. However, the Tribunal noted that the loans were given and taken on a current account basis, with interest being paid and charged at the same rate, thus allowing the appeal.

5. The disallowance of interest expenses under section 14A of the Act was also addressed. The assessee voluntarily disallowed interest under section 14A, and it was argued that if any portion of interest paid was disallowed, the disallowance under section 14A should be reduced to avoid double taxation. The Tribunal directed the AO to reduce the disallowance under section 14A if any portion of interest paid was disallowed and sustained by the Tribunal.