9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 560X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mon ground of appeal in both the appeals. Thus, both the appeals were heard together and are decided by a consolidated order to avoid the conflicting decision. ITA No. 3377/Mum/2012 for AY-2006-07 2. In this appeal the assessee has raised solitary ground of appeal that the ld. CIT(A) erred in law in not allowing the claim towards the payment of Custom Duty amounting to Rs. 93,12,158/-. 3. Brief facts of the case relating to the ground of appeal are that assessee is proprietor of M/s M.B Sales Corporation. The assessee is trading in viz. Potassium Cyanide and Sodium Cyanide, Chemicals used in Electro Plating Industry and for making compound of Cyanides. The assessee also deals in Pig hairs used in Paint Brush Industry and Textile Brushes ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... duty of Rs. 1,04,47,991/- relates to assessee and rest of the balance duty claimed by assessee at Rs. 93,12,159/- relates to some other person. As assessee failed to produce any evidence to substantiate as to how the amount of Rs. 93,12,158/- relates to assessee. The AO disallowed the same. It was further argued that during the appellate stage, the assessee failed to substantiate his contention or to prove that the said liability on account of import duty was paid by assessee. It was further argued that the grounds of appeal raised by assessee are liable to be dismissed. 6. We have considered the contention of ld. DR for the Revenue and have gone through the orders of authorities below carefully. The AO disallowed Rs. 93,12,159/- holding t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -. The assessment was completed on 23.12.2010 u/s. 143(3) of the Act. The Assessing Officer (AO) while framing assessment disallowed the Interest Expenses of Rs. 16,44,921/-.The AO disallowed the Interest Expenses of Rs. 16,44,921/- holding that in the AY 2006-07, a sum of Rs. 93,12,159/- on account of Import Duty was disallowed which was in the name of some other party, therefore, the Interest Expenses pertaining to the same Import Duty, claimed during the year under consideration was also disallowed. As the loss was converted into income in AY 2006-07 therefore, there was no brought forward loss available to the assessee and accordingly disallowed it. On appeal before the ld. CIT(A), both the action of AO was sustained. Thus, further aggr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... disallowance of Custom Duty of Rs. 93,12,159/-. The assessee has not disputed the Interest Expenses of Rs. 16,44,921/- claimed during the year under consideration was not related with the disallowance of Custom duty of Rs. 93,12,159/-, disallowed in AY 2006- 07. The ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of AO holding that the disallowance of Custom Duty for AY 2006-07 was already upheld. Thus, the disallowance of proportionate interest expenses was also upheld by ld CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) also considered the claim of set off of brought forward losses. The ld CIT(A) observed that the loss claimed by the assessee in AY 2005-06 was converted into income and therefore, there was no brought forward losses available to the assessee for set off of again ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
