9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (3) TMI 68X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... deleting the addition of Rs. 12,64,851 on account of disallowance of interest, especially when the interest-bearing funds were diverted to non-business purpose ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 2,60,848 on account of legal and professional expenses for ser ices relating to leasing of gas cylinders, especially when the assessee prima facie admitted this transaction to be the only paper transaction and did not claim depreciation and also did not offer any lease rent in respect of leasing of gas cylinders ?" 2 In short, the question that arises for consideration in this appeal filed by the Revenue is whether the Tribunal was justified in hold ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee with M/s. M. M. Industries is genuine and proper. It was further held that once the transaction in question is held to be genuine, the same has got to be given effect to. As a consequence, the disallowance of inter est to the bank to the extent of Rs. 12,64,851 paid by the assessee under section 36(1)(iii) ibid was set aside and instead, the assessee was allowed to claim the benefit of section 36(1)(iii) for claiming deduction towards payment of interest in respect of capital borrowed for the purpose of business . It is against this finding of the Tribunal, the Revenue has come up in appeal. 4 Heard Shri R. L. Jain, learned senior counsel with Ku. V. Mandlik, learned counsel for the appellant and Shri R. K. Sarda, learn ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Income-tax (Appeals) and delete this addition." 7 Mere perusal of the aforesaid paragraph would indicate that the Tribunal went into the factual aspects of the case and having examined the factual documents brought on record at the instance of the assessee in support of the bona fides of the transactions in question, recorded a finding of genuineness of the transaction. In other words, the Tribunal was satisfied on the facts that the transaction in question is not bogus but genuine. It could be entered into in the circumstances appearing and there is a reason for its entering by the assessee for their business with the company. 8 In our opinion, the aforesaid finding being a finding of fact, this court cannot upset such finding of fact in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he advance amount. Every transaction has got to be examined on its terms and conditions entered into between the parties and with a view to find out whether it is a genuine one or not. In this case, the Tribunal did record a finding that it is genuine. Such find ing, as observed supra, is binding on this court. 11 So far as the second question of law is concerned, the Tribunal decided in favour of the assessee because the other two main questions referred to above were answered in favour of the assessee. Since we have also upheld the finding on other two main questions, i.e., one which is the subject- matter of this appeal and other which is the subject-matter of ITA No. 91 of 1993 the second question framed in this appeal has to be answer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
