9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (7) TMI 356 - AT - Income TaxDisallowance u/s 14A - Held that - The issue is squarely covered by the decision of Hon ble Delhi High court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. vs. CIT (2015 (9) TMI 238 - DELHI HIGH COURT), wherein the disallowance is to be restricted to the extent of exempt income only. We restrict the disallowance to the extent of exempt income of ₹ 10.75 only. This issue of the assessee s appeal is partly allowed. Disallowing the interest expenses - Held that - NMW has not revised TDS return till 16-08-2014. NMW is revised the TDS return only when the Revenue pointed out to the assessee to reconcile the gross receipts with TDS return. Accordingly, we are of the view that entire reversal of interest is an afterthought to reduce the taxable income of the assessee and this is not done bonafide. Even now before us, the assessee could not substantiate that NMW was facing financial hardship. Assessee relied on the case of CIT vs. Neon solutions Pvt. Ltd (2016 (4) TMI 1162 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT), but we find that in the case before Hon ble Bombay High court the board resolution for waiver of interest on debentures was passed on 31-05-2004 and approved by board for waiver of interest for 6 years and including AY 2007-08 and 2009-10. But in the present case before us, the reduction was done after almost 2 years i.e. on 31-07-2012 for the AY 2012-13. Hence, the facts are entirely different and distinguishable. - Decided against assessee.
Issues Involved:
1. Disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(iii) relating to exempt income. 2. Addition on account of interest amounting to ?93,24,110. Detailed Analysis: 1. Disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(iii): The first issue concerns the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer (AO) under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, read with Rule 8D(2)(iii). The AO disallowed ?4,89,511 as expenses related to exempt income, specifically dividend income of ?10.75. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] confirmed this disallowance. The assessee appealed against this decision. The Tribunal noted that the issue was covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Delhi). The Delhi High Court held that "Section 14A will not apply if no exempt income is received or receivable during the relevant previous year." Therefore, the disallowance should be restricted to the extent of the exempt income received, which in this case was ?10.75. Respectfully following this precedent, the Tribunal restricted the disallowance to ?10.75, partly allowing the assessee's appeal on this issue. 2. Addition on account of interest amounting to ?93,24,110: The second issue involves the addition of ?93,24,110 on account of interest. The AO observed that the assessee disclosed interest income of ?27,97,232 from Next Media Works Limited (NMW) in its Profit & Loss Account, whereas Form 26AS showed interest income of ?1,21,21,342. The AO added the differential amount of ?93,24,110, citing discrepancies and lack of convincing explanations from the assessee. The AO's detailed observations included: - NMW credited interest at 13% for five quarters, only revising it to 3% later. - The reversal of interest was considered an afterthought to reduce taxable income. - The revision of TDS returns by NMW was delayed until the AO raised the issue during scrutiny. - The AO concluded that the arrangement was a colorable device with fraudulent intentions. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's decision, agreeing that the assessee could not substantiate the reduced interest rate of 3% and confirming the addition. Before the Tribunal, the assessee argued that the interest rate was revised due to financial hardships faced by NMW and that the revised TDS return was submitted. However, the Tribunal found that the assessee failed to provide sufficient evidence of NMW's financial hardship and noted the delayed revision of TDS returns. The Tribunal also distinguished the case from the precedent cited by the assessee (CIT vs. Neon Solutions Pvt. Ltd.), where the waiver of interest was pre-approved by the board resolution, unlike the present case where the reduction was done after almost two years. In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the lower authorities' decision, confirming the addition of ?93,24,110 and dismissing the assessee's appeal on this issue. Final Outcome: The appeal of the assessee was partly allowed, with the disallowance under Section 14A being restricted to ?10.75, and the addition on account of interest being upheld. The order was pronounced in the open court on 29-06-2018.
|
