9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (2) TMI 85X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... merit and not without disputing the documents (agreement to sell) in question sought to be brought on record by the assessee. The claim of the assessee cannot be thrown into the dustbin on the basis of conjectures and surmises that the agreement does not prove any nexus between the interest income earned form FDR and interest paid on OD account claimed u/s 57 of the Act without declaring the agreement as false and frivolous document. Without entering into the merits of the case, we are of the considered view that the file is required to be restored to Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication by taking out into account the loan documents relied upon by the assessee. Needless to say that Ld. CIT(A) is require to provide adequate opportunity of b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... derstand that sufficient nexus existed between borrowing of funds from the bank and interest income earned on the FDR and also failed to appreciate that the intention of the Appellant was to take up activities in the nature of purchase and sale of properties, and therefore the impugned Order is erroneous and is bad in law and deserves to be set aside. 3.1 That within the facts and circumstances of the case and law on the point, the learned CIT (A) has erred in confirming disallowance of interest of ₹ 27,29,491.00 paid by the Appellant which was adjusted out of interest income earned by the Appellant on fixed deposits for the reason that there is no nexus between the interest income earned on fixed deposit receipt and interest pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (A) has erred in disallowing interest of ₹ 27,29,491.00 claimed as deduction under section 57 of the Act and ignoring the fact that payment of interest provided an arbitrage to the Appellant by way of setting off the same against higher amount of income earned by the Appellant, and that the rejection of the aforesaid argument of the Appellant is a simplicitor rejection without providing any reason therefore, and therefore, the impugned Order is erroneous and is bad in law and deserves to be set aside. 3.4 That within the facts and circumstances of the case and the law on the point the learned CIT(A) has without being supported by any precedents, erred in disregarding the decision of the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct amounting to ₹ 27,29,491/- shall not be allowed. Finding the explanation filed by the assessee not tenable and in view of the fact that the payment of interest for the purchase of property cannot be treated as expenditure wholly and exclusively for the purpose of earning interest income from FD, the addition of ₹ 27,29,491/- has been made. 4. The assessee carried the matter before Ld. CIT(A) who has dismissed the appeal vide impugned order. Feeling aggrieved, the assessee has come up before the Tribunal by way of filing the present appeal. 5. Ld. A.R. for the assessee challenging the impugned order contended that Ld. CIT(A) has arbitrarily decided the appeal without entertaining additional evidence ought to be brought o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessment order. The Assessing Officer opined that submission of these agreements does not prove any nexus between the interest income earned on FOR and 'interest paid on overdraft account which was claimed u/s 57 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Since, the additional evidence has no relevance in any way to the issues raised in the appeal, the same is therefore not admitted. 10. Bare perusal of the findings returned by Ld. CIT(A) reproduced above go to prove that Ld. CIT(A) has not applied his mind to decide the evidentiary value of the documents sought to be brought on record by the assessee rather acted as a post office to tow the line of Assessing Officer. When the assessee has specifically come up with the defense that the d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
