9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (2) TMI 429X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... facts that the addition made in reference to interest payment of Rs.13,15,697/-. It is prayed that in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, there is no justification for confirming the aforesaid disallowance viz. notional interest payment which is based on assumption and presumption without any nexus proved by the Department. It is further prayed that the learned lower authority ha totally erred in relying upon the order of asstt.eyar 2005-06 in the case of the assessee in ITA No.960/Ahd/2008 dated 01.07.08. It is prayed that the facts are totally distinguishable and each is separate assessment year, and as such, there is no justification for confirming the addition on this ground also. 2. Without prejudice, it is prayed that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e learned counsel for the assessee, in his rejoinder, submitted that in the earlier assessment year 2005-06, reserves and surplus were not sufficient and this plea was taken by the assessee before the appellate authority, and therefore, the order in the assessment year 2005-06, is not relevant for deciding the issue before the Tribunal. 4. We have considered rival submissions and have perused the orders of the AO and the CIT(A), and also chart showing the amount of reserves and surplus and also interest free advance during the year. We find that there is no finding recorded by the revenue authorities that whether the reserves and surplus of the assessee for the relevant year were more than the interest free advance of the assessee. The CIT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is prayed that as per the submission made before CIT(A), his order page 5 para 3.2 in view of the various judicial pronouncement in reference to sec.41(1), the disallowance made is required to be deleted though agreed before the AO during the course of assessment proceedings. The decision of CIT Vs. GP international Ltd., 325 ITR 25 (P&H) is relied upon along with the other decisions as stated before CIT(A)." 6. The learned counsel for the assessee has not pressed this ground, which is accordingly dismissed. ITA No.2491/Ahd/2011 (Asstt.Year 2008-2009) 7. The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the only effective ground of the appeal of the assessee is ground no.1, which is reproduced below: "1. In confirming the disallowanc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he earlier assessment year 2007-2008. We have considered rival submissions. In view of our decision in restoring the issue to the file of the AO in earlier assessment year 2007-08, for the reasons recorded in the foregoing paras of this order, while disposing of the appeal of the assessee for the earlier assessment year 2007-2008, the issue in this ground of the appeal is restored to the file of the AO for de novo decision with similar direction as contained in the foregoing paras of this order. We direct accordingly. 11. In the result, the appeal of the assessee for the assessment year 2007-2008 is partly allowed for statistical purpose and that of the assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-10 are allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
