9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 384X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppeals by the Revenue pertain to the assessment years 2005-2006 and 2006-2007. Since the issue involved in both the appeals is identical we proceed to dispose of the appeals by a common order for the sake of convenience. Grounds raised by the Revenue are extracted for immediate reference. 1. The Order of the CIT(A) is opposed to law and facts of the case. &nb ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored." 2. Admittedly, Assessing Officer sought to bring to tax notional interest income on the ground that the assessee ought to have charged interest at 12% on the loans advanced to various parties. The case of the assessee was that the amounts were advanced in the course of its business and while returning such amounts some of them have com ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the assessee. 3. On an appeal filed by the assessee, the learned CIT(A) observed that the assessee had justifiable reasons for advancing the amounts in its capacity as a prudent businessman. At any rate, notional interest cannot be added to the taxable income. In fact, the Assessing Officer has not added any notional income but merely sought to disallow interest paid by the assessee presumably ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g Officer were set aside. 4. Though the Revenue strongly relied upon the reasons given by the Assessing Officer, learned DR was unable to contradict the findings of the learned CIT(A) with regard to factum of nonutilisation of the interest bearing funds for giving interest free advances. Such being the case, we are of the view that the Revenue has not made out a case for disallowing the claim of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
