2016 (1) TMI 84

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... l concurred with the view of the CIT (Appeals) and held that the amounts were not in the nature of Inter Corporate Deposits and were therefore, not to be treated as loans or advances as contemplated in section 2(22)(e) of the Act. The issue is substantially one of appreciation of facts. When the CIT(Appeals) as well as Tribunal concurrently held that looking to large number of adjustment entries in the accounts between two entities, the amounts were not in the nature of loan or deposit, but merely adjustments, application of section 2(22)(e) of the Act would not arise - Decided against revenue - Tax Appeal No. 958, 959 of 2015 - - - Dated:- 21-12-2015 - Akil Kureshi And Mohinder Pal, JJ. For the Appellant : Mrs Mauna M Bhatt, Ad .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... transactions. Meaning thereby, the appellant has given and received funds as and when required to and from its associate concern. It is not an account whereby loans and advances have been given to the associate concern. It is an account which is in the nature of current adjustment accommodation account wherein there is a movement of fund both ways, on need basis. Unlike transactions of loans and advances, in this kind of current adjustment accommodation account, the movement of hinds is both ways and the same is more in the nature of current account rather than a loan account. Transactions in the nature of loans and advances are usually very few and for a longer duration. In the facts of the present case, the nature of the transaction is in .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ere was movement of fund both ways on need basis. The transactions in the nature of loans and advances are usually very few in number whereas in the present case, such transactions are in the form of current accommodation adjustment entries. The Commissioner therefore, held that the transactions were not in the nature of loans and advances. The Revenue carried the matter in appeal. The Tribunal concurred with the view of the CIT (Appeals) and held that the amounts were not in the nature of Inter Corporate Deposits and were therefore, not to be treated as loans or advances as contemplated in section 2(22)(e) of the Act. 5. The issue is substantially one of appreciation of facts. When the CIT(Appeals) as well as Tribunal concurrently held .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X