2019 (11) TMI 804 - AT - Income Tax

Disallowance u/s 36(1)(iii) - deduction of the interest - HELD THAT - Object of the assessee company for which it was established are, to carry on business in Hotels also. The assessee during the year under consideration has earned interest on loan only. The assessee claimed that in pursuance of the objects, the assessee made investment in M/s. Minor Hotels Pvt. Ltd. The assessee company is holding 32% of equity share capital and 100% of preference share capital issued by Minor hotels. The assessee was in the process of establishing hotel project, but, due to some litigation it was delayed. It is not always necessary that assessee should earn profit in assessment year under appeal in order to claim deduction of the expenditure. The assessee made investment in the group companies to take controlling interest in the group company. The assessee for that purpose has joined the JV and SVP also. It is not in dispute that assessee has borrowed money for business purpose and made investment in M/s. Minor Hotels Pvt. Ltd., and paid interest also. The genuineness of the payment of interest is not in dispute. Therefore, assessee is entitled for deduction of the interest in assessment year under appeal. The assessee made investment utilizing the borrowed funds for strategic business purposes and the amount borrowed have been utilised for business purpose only. Assessee has satisfied the conditions of Section 36(1) (iii) - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to disallowance under section 36(1)(iii) of the I.T. Act, 1961.

Analysis:

1. Facts and Disallowance: The assessee filed a return declaring a loss and claimed finance cost and other expenses. The assessing officer (A.O.) disallowed the claimed expenses as they were related to investments in other companies and not directly linked to the assessee's business activities. The A.O. found that the interest claimed was on unsecured loans taken from specific parties and utilized for investments, leading to the disallowance under section 36(1)(iii).

2. Assessee's Arguments: The assessee contended that the investments were strategic for business purposes, aiming to control group companies. The assessee highlighted its business objectives, including owning, building, and developing properties, and argued that the investments were in line with its business model. The assessee also cited various case laws to support the claim that interest on borrowed funds for strategic investments is an allowable deduction.

3. CIT(A) Decision: The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) upheld the disallowance, noting that the assessee's activities were more related to financing and investment rather than the business activities specified in its Memorandum of Association (MoA). The CIT(A) agreed with the A.O.'s interpretation that the investments did not align with the business activities outlined in the MoA.

4. Tribunal's Decision: The Tribunal considered the conditions for deduction under section 36(1)(iii) of the I.T. Act, emphasizing that borrowed funds must be used for business purposes, and interest paid on such amounts can be claimed as a deduction. Referring to relevant case laws, the Tribunal concluded that the investments made by the assessee were strategic for business purposes, aligning with its objectives and business model. The Tribunal found that the borrowed funds were utilized for business activities, justifying the deduction claimed by the assessee. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the lower authorities' orders and allowed the appeal of the assessee.

5. Conclusion: The Tribunal's decision favored the assessee, recognizing that the investments made using borrowed funds were for strategic business purposes, in line with the company's objectives. By satisfying the conditions of section 36(1)(iii) of the I.T. Act, the Tribunal allowed the deduction of interest claimed by the assessee, overturning the disallowance made by the lower authorities.

This detailed analysis outlines the progression of arguments and decisions leading to the Tribunal's judgment in favor of the assessee, emphasizing the strategic nature of the investments and their alignment with the business objectives to justify the deduction claimed under section 36(1)(iii) of the I.T. Act, 1961.