9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (6) TMI 360X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he form of entrance fee and membership fee available with the company in question was more than the advance received by the assessee from the said company - the Revenue has admitted the fact, that the interest has actually been paid by the assessee in respect of amounts received from ‘CCCPL’ – thus, there was no reason to interfere with the order of the CIT(A) – Decided against Revenue. - I.T.A. No. 426/Mds/2014 - - - Dated:- 16-5-2014 - Shri A. Mohan Alankamony And Shri Vikas Awasthy,JJ. For the Appellant : Shri. Shaji P. Jacob, IRS, Addl.CIT. For the Respondent : None ORDER Per Vikas Awasthy, Judicial Member The appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (App ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it is not a perquisite u/s. 2(24)(iv) of the Act and the Assessing Officer was directed to delete the addition. The Revenue carried appeal to the Tribunal in ITA No.668/Mds/2013. The Tribunal upheld the findings of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and dismissed the appeal of the Revenue. In the assessment year under consideration there is no change of facts and circumstances. The assessee has paid interest of D10,00,000/- which has been reflected in the return of income of the assessee for the assessment year 2013-14. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) allowed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved against the order, the Revenue has come in appeal before the Tribunal. 4. Shri. Shaji P. Jacob representing the department su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... evenue has not disputed the fact that the interest was actually paid by the assessee in respect of advances received by it from the company for the year under consideration. The only contention was that as the interest was paid in subsequent year, so it was an afterthought and therefore should be ignored. The fact that interest was paid on the advance received by the assessee was not denied. Thus, we do not find any error in the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) that the loan received by the assessee from the company in question was not interest-free loan, but the same was interest bearing loan. Further no material could be brought on record by the Revenue to show that any interest expenditure was actually incurred by the company in question for o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
