9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 362X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an which was advanced was not a loan but investment. In our considered opinion, that was not the foundation of the reasoning adopted by the Assessing Officer, therefore, the reasoning adopted by the Tribunal in para 15 is not permissible in law. The above finding given by the Tribunal is clearly contrary to material available on record and perverse and hence the order impugned passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is set aside. We restore the order of CIT(Appeals) and hold that in the facts of the present case, the addition made by the Assessing Officer requires to be deleted and the payment made to the bank by way of interest on loan is required to be allowed as provided under section 36(1)(iii) read with Section 37(1) of the Inco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bank was doubted. However, CIT (Appeals) observed in para 3.1 to 4 as under: 3.1. The grievance of the appellant is that the addition so made was unjust. The appellant company has raised a loan from M/s ANZ Gridlays Bank, Bombay and repaid the same before the close of the year through M/s Relico (India) Ltd. which had made the repayment of ₹ 1,14,49,972/- in the said firm. The loan has not appeared in the balance-sheet because the payment was made during the relevant accounting period through the said party. It has also submitted a certificate from M/s Relico (India) Ltd. to the effect that the loan availed by the appellant from M/s ANZ Grindlays Bank, Bombay was cleared through them and the said Co. is assessed by I.T.O., Ward 3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ever germane in the order of the Assessing Officer or the order of CIT (Appeals) and, therefore, on the premise that the loan which was advanced was not a loan but investment. In our considered opinion, that was not the foundation of the reasoning adopted by the Assessing Officer, therefore, the reasoning adopted by the Tribunal in para 15 is not permissible in law. The Tribunal in para 15 has observed as under: 15. We have carefully considered the rival submission of both the parties, perused the material available on record and the decisions relied upon by the Id. A/R. We find that for taking over the controlling interest and management of the sick industry M/s. Mewar Sugar Mills Ltd., the assesseecompany, as per the order of the BIF ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
