9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (4) TMI 518X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h does not need any interference on our part - Decided against revenue X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and has also given loan to his group companies and has charge interest of ₹ 4,51,42,911/-. Whereas on the other side the assessee has paid interest of ₹ 5,98,18,919/- the position clearly specifies that the assessee has charge lesser amount of interest from the group companies as compare to the interest paid on the borrowed amount from the group companies. AO further noted that average interest cost debited in the P&L account, on interest free advancse and investments in the shape of purchase of shares and also investment in capital work in progress is not admissible deduction under section 36(1)(iii) of the Act. Accordingly, an amount of ₹ 1.35 crores was disallowed u/s. 36(1)iii) of the Act and assessed the income of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd advances of ₹ 28,03,29,158/- to the subsidiaries and disallowed the interest of ₹ 1,35,00,000/- u/s. 36(1)(iii) of the Act by relying on various judicial precedents. However, the Ld. CIT(A)-XIII, New Delhi in assesee's own case for AY 2009-10 while considering the issue in dispute, has concluded to delete the addition in dispute by holding as under:- "I have considered the submission of the assessee, observation of the AO and various judicial pronouncements relied upon by the assessee on this issue. It is seen that assessee has made investment in the shares of subsidiary and joint venture companies during the year to have controlling stakes in such companies. During the year, the assessee has invested ₹ 10,26,00,000/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i in ITA No. 4760/Del/2012 for AY 2009-10 has confirmed the order of the CITXIII, New Delhi in assessee's own case, as aforesaid. 6.2 We further note that Ld. DR failed to bring any decision of the Tribunal or higher Courts in the case of assessee or in the group cases. However, on similar facts, the Ld. CIT(A) has followed the decision of the Ld. CIT(A)-XIII in AY 2009-10 and Tribunal in assessee's own case which is directly applicable in the present case. 6.3 On perusing the impugned order page no. 11 & 12 it reveals that the company has advanced a loan of Rs. ,04,05,929/- and tax of ₹ 32,70,298/- has been deducted on source. These details were available before the AO and he proceeded to make the disallowance of interest of ₹ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
