9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (1) TMI 242X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... VOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT MR RK PATEL, ADVOCATE FOR THE RESPONDENT ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.J.THAKER) 1. By way of this appeal, the appellant-Revenue has challenged the order dated 1.5.2000 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench SMS in ITA No. 6071/Ahd/1994 for Assessment Year 1991-92. 2. While admitting the appeal on 15.1.2001, this Court has framed the following substantial question of law for consideration, as follows: Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Incometax Appellate Tribunal has substantially erred in law in confirming the allowance of interest of ₹ 4,22,557/- ? 3. The brief facts of the present case are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing Bank Charges. From the facts of the case, it is seen that expenditure of ₹ 4,22,557/- incurred in respect of interest and bank charges are not for the puropse of business and assessee is not entitled for deduction of this expenditure from its business income. The assessee has obtained loan from Dena Bank on which interest of ₹ 3,29,273/- has been paid. The interest of ₹ 86,977/- was paid to the other creditors. The assessee was requested to explain why this amount should not be disallowed as same was not a business expenditure. The assessee company has filed its reply by letter dated 10.2.1994 and 18.2.1994 and submitted that the same are made in the assessment proceeding for A.Y. 1990-91. As mentioned in the assessmen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... terest was deleted by the first appellate authority in the subsequent years. Therefore, considering the entire circumstances of the case, the finding recorded by the CIT(A) is upheld. Mr. Parikh learned advocate appearing for the appellant- Revenue has submitted that the question has to be answered in favour of the revenue. He has taken us through the finding of facts recorded by the CIT(A), which reads as under: I have considered the submissions made on behalf of the appellant. The issues for consideration are whether the expenditure was incurred for the business purposes. Secondly, whether it was a totally business proposition with an intention to earn profit. It is observed that as per the terms of the contract, the appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3. At the out set the ld. Counsel on behalf of the assesseee has submitted before me that in the case of M/s. S.N. Builders Pvt. Ltd., where identical fact is involved,the issue came up before the Tribunal and the Tribunal upheld the finding recorded by the Ld. CIT(A). Copy of the order of the Tribunal in ITA No. 907/Ahd/1993 has been filed alongwith the paper-book. The Ld. DR however, supported the order passed by the Assessing Officer. 4. Having heard both the sides, I find that identical fact is involved in all the appeals. The assessee had taken loan form the bank and paid to Payal Co-op. Housing Soc. Ltd. for purchase of land. This arrangement was made pursuant to the agreement entered into between the asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
