9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 221X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndoned. Appeal is admitted. 3. Grounds taken by the Revenue are reproduced hereunder:- 1. ''The assessing officer erred in this disallowing interest payment raised en house property. 2. The assessing officer erred in this disallowing interest payment made by account payee cheques assess to tax. 3. The ClT appeal erred in rejecting the interest payment to creditors for non availability of confirmation letter. 4. The ClT appeal erred in not considering the PAN No. ledger account and the interest payment made by banking channels by account payee cheque of the creditors. 5. The assessing officer erred in initiating penalty proceedings''. 4. Through the above grounds, assessee is aggrieved on disallowance of Rs. 1,26,500/- claim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rised Representative, apart from these unsecured loans to the tune of B99,93,000/- was unavailable with the assessee. Further, as per the ld. Authorised Representative, interest payments made on the loans ought not have been disallowed since advances were given to related concerns due to commercial expediency. 7. Per contra, ld. Departmental Representative fairly admitted that para 4 of the assessment order, which dealt with disallowance of interest B7,52,547/- was not clear. Nevertheless, according to him for the sum of B1,26,500/- claimed as interest on borrowed capital against rental income, assessee was not able to furnish any evidence, despite sufficient opportunities granted by the lower authorities. 8. I have considered the rival c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat was held by ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) at para 4 of his order is reproduced hereunder:- ''I have considered the grounds, written submissions and documents filed by the AR during the hearing. As per the balance sheet, the appellant had advanced loans to related concerns namely Mls Saberwal Surgical Company Pvt Ltd and Mls Jupiter Manufacturing Works but did not show any interest receipt for these parties. On perusal of balance sheet, it is noticed that the appellant had capital of about Rs. 63.43 lakhs against which investment of about RS.90.24 lakhs were shown which means that advances to related concerns are not given out of capital. The appellant had shown unsecured loans of Rs. 99.93. lakhs and advances of Rs. 59.12. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dichotomy between the observations of the ld. Assessing Officer and what is stated by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). It is not even clear, as to the head of income under which ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) considered the interest. Though it is stated by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that assessee had advanced loans to sister concerns, it is also mentioned that assessee did not file any confirmation of the loan creditors. The disallowance was for interest and not for unconfirmed credits. Considering the contradictory stands taken by the ld. Assessing Officer and ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), I am of the opinion that question whether any interest disallowance was warranted, needs a revisit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
