Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2014 (9) TMI 885

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... at bank funds have been diverted as interest free/lower interest advances - no material has been brought on record by the revenue either to demonstrate that the sarafi business was bogus or to establish diversion of interest bearing funds as low/interest free advances - revenue is not in a position to point out any material to the contrary so as to dislodge the concurrent findings of fact recorded by the CIT(A) and the Tribunal - the Tribunal has based its conclusion on the concurrent findings of fact recorded by it upon appreciation of the evidence on record – thus, the order of the Tribunal is upheld – Decided against revenue. - Tax Appeal No. 868 of 2014 - - - Dated:- 19-8-2014 - Harsha Devani And Sonia Gokani,JJ. For the Appella .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the year, and accordingly, disallowed the loss claimed on Sarafi business. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Commissioner [Appeals], who deleted the addition. Revenue carried the matter in appeal before the Tribunal, but, failed. 3. Mr. Sudhir Mehta, learned senior standing counsel for the appellant reiterated the grounds stated by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order. 4. As can be seen from the order dated 3rd March 2009, the Commissioner [Appeals], after appreciating the evidence on record has recorded thus - 2.3.4 Regarding the bank interest of ₹ 39,49,753/-, while it is difficult to accept the appellant's point of view that the loan obtained has been only utilized for the Isabgul trading .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... interest-free or a lower interest advances is not practicable. 2.3.6 Whatever the appellant has charged interest, it has been in the region of 12% to 15%. It is worth pointing out that in the case of the biggest depositor ie., Rakesh Construction Company with an outstanding of ₹ 1,79,14,524/=, the appellant has charged 12% interest only. The only significant verification is the advance to one M/s. Purushottambhai A. Patel, HUF where 6% has been charged [other item of 6% are minor and ignored]. Other that than, there are certain charitable trusts to whom the interest-free advances of less than 12% rate of interest is so small compared to the overall level of advances made or the funds received whether from Bank or otherwise that no .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ccount of excess of interest paid over the interest gain to be not properly explained and the same was not allowable. We find that CIT(A) while deleting the addition has held that Assessee was running sarafi business in a commercial sense. He had further noted that the manner in which the Assessee was running the business, the funds obtained from the bank against the stock got merged with the overall funds of the other businesses and bank loan that was obtained by the Assessee against the stock of Isabgul was partly liquidated by the funds arising out of the transaction in sarafi business. He has further held that the total amount of funds available from sarafi business was almost of the same order as funds available from bank and in such a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... so as to dislodge the concurrent findings of fact recorded by the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Appellate Tribunal. From the facts noted hereinabove, it is apparent that the Tribunal has based its conclusion on the concurrent findings of fact recorded by it upon appreciation of the evidence on record. It is not the case of the appellant that the Tribunal, while appreciating the evidence on record has taken into consideration any irrelevant material, or that any relevant material has been ignored. Under the circumstances, in the absence of any perversity being pointed out in the concurred findings of fact recorded by the Tribunal, no question of law, much less, any substantial question of law can be said to arise out of the impugned order .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates