9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (4) TMI 229X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are not the issue in the present case. In this view of the matter no reason to interfere in the order of the CIT(A) on this issue, which is upheld - against revenue. Disallowance made by the A. O. under section 43B - deduction on account of interest payment disallowed - CIT(A) deleted the addition - Held that:- On perusal of the Annexure and ledger account as on 31-03-2002 it reveals that the assessee had paid the accrued interest on its borrowings from GIIC which is a State Industrial Investment Corporation before the date of filing of its return of income which the learned AO failed to appreciate and by wrongly invoking the provision of section 43B made the additions. The CIT(A) on proper appreciation of the facts of the case as well ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ear 2001-02 on 30-10-2001 declaring total loss of Rs.1,90,89,652/- and subsequently filed its revised return on 20-10- 2002 declaring loss at Rs.2,66,37,785/-. The learned AO issued notice u/s 148 of the Act on 31-03-2008 after duly recording the reasons and the assessee vide its letter dated 26-08-2008 submitted that the return filed by the assessee on 20-10-2002 may be treated to have been filed in response there to. Thereafter, the learned AO vide letter dated 27-08-2008 had given the reasons of reopening to the assessee against which the assessed did not raise any objection. Latter on, the learned AO served notice u/s 143(2) of the Act on the assessee on 03-09-2008 and finally passed assessment order u/s 143(3) read with section 147 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e such as ledger folio number, share certificate numbers, allotment letter etc. regarding issue of equity shares to establish genuineness of the transaction." 4.1 The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the learned CIT(A) who in turn directed the learned AO to delete the addition made u/s 68 of the Act. 4.2 Aggrieved by this order of the learned CIT(A), the revenue is in appeal before us. 5. Before us, the learned DR supported the order of the learned AO. On the other hand the learned AR relied on the order of the learned CIT(A) and further submitted that this issue is covered in favour of the assessee and against the revenue by the order of the ITAT Ahmedabad "B" Bench dated 31-07-2008 passed in the case of DCIT, Circle-4 Vs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rt that receipt of funds through automatic channels is also not disputed. Onus cast on the assessee to prove its case has been discharged and there is no reason to make a contrary view. Grievance of the Department that assessee has not complied with requirement of the various related laws which is not appeared to be true. Nature and source of funds have been explained to the AO with documentary evidences, which have not been fully appreciated by the AO to arrive at a logical conclusion. Nothing on record to suggest that the impugned transaction of shares are sham or bogus and/or simple paper transactions, and amount to hawala transaction, therefore, the findings of the CIT(A) cannot be said to be erroneous and perverse. The case laws cited ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he learned CIT(A) observed in Para 5.1 and 5.2 of his order as under: "5.1 The AO noticed from the statement of total income that the assessee has claimed deduction on account of interest payment of Rs.40,78,870/- and Rs.10,55,071/- on payment basis u/s. 43B. The following sums were paid after the end of FY 2000-01:- Date Amount 12.04.2001 Rs.1200000 24.04.2001 Rs.699870 24.04.2001 Rs.100130 12.05.2001 Rs.500000 19.05.2001 Rs.454941 Total Rs.29549941 Thus, these sums were paid after the expiry of FY 2000- 01 and as the liability for these expenses was incurred in a previous year earlier than 2000-01 and the claim of Rs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ave heard the rival submissions and peruse the orders of the revenue authorities along with the materials produced before us. On perusal of the Annexure and ledger account as on 31-03-2002 it reveals that the assessee had paid the accrued interest on its borrowings from GIIC which is a State Industrial Investment Corporation before the date of filing of its return of income which the learned AO failed to appreciate and by wrongly invoking the provision of section 43B of the Act made the addition Rs.29,54,941/-. The learned CIT(A) on proper appreciation of the facts of the case as well as the provisions of section 43B of the Act had directed the learned AO to delete the addition so made by the learned AO. From the above discussions, we find ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
