2016 (3) TMI 683 - HC - Income Tax

Disallowance of interest on the loans advanced by the assessee to its sister concerns - Held that - a look at the orders of the three Authorities would show that there was no basis for the Authorities to come to the conclusion that the amounts were lent for non business purposes. M/s.Kriscast is obviously a casting company. The appellant is a manufacturer of G.I. castings. There was no indication about the nature of businesses that the appellant as well as the borrowers were engaged in. A finding made on thin air that the amounts were lent for non business purposes cannot be sustained. The assessment years are 1991-92 and 1993-94. Therefore, we have ventured to go into the merits of the case rather than sending the matters back to the Tribunal on the ground of failure to afford a reasonable opportunity. - Decided in favour of assessee

Summary

Issues:
1. Disallowance of interest on loans advanced to sister concerns.
2. Disallowance of notional interest on outstanding amounts.
3. Proper appreciation of written submissions by the Tribunal.

Analysis:
1. The appellant filed returns for the assessment years 1991-92 and 1993-94, admitting income and loss, respectively. The Assessing Officer disallowed interest on loans advanced to a sister concern, M/s. Kriscast, at 24% per annum. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) partially allowed the appeal, limiting the disallowance to the amount advanced during the relevant assessment year. However, the Tribunal, in an ex parte order for 1991-92 and after hearing arguments for 1993-94, restored the original orders of the Assessing Officer. The main contention was the diversion of funds for non-business purposes. The High Court found no basis for this conclusion as both parties were engaged in casting businesses, leading to the allowance of the appeals.

2. The Tribunal's decision to disallow notional interest at 24% on outstanding amounts without considering the opening balance and payments made during the relevant year was challenged. The High Court noted the lack of proper appreciation of written submissions by the Tribunal. The Court emphasized the importance of considering all relevant financial aspects before making such disallowances, leading to the judgment in favor of the appellant.

3. The High Court critically analyzed the reasons behind the disallowance of interest on loans advanced to sister concerns. It was observed that the Authorities failed to establish that the loans were diverted for non-business purposes. The Court delved into the nature of businesses of both parties and found no substantial evidence supporting the disallowance. Therefore, the Court allowed the appeals and answered the questions of law in favor of the assessee, highlighting the lack of a valid basis for the disallowances made by the Authorities.