9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (9) TMI 850X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... k Township Pvt. Ltd., (supra) has given a finding that M/s. Sun Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., has included the amount of interest paid by the assessee in its return of income and has paid taxes on the same. Considering the aforesaid facts, CIT(A) has rightly deleted the addition - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No.159/PUN/2019 Assessment Year : 2012-13 - - - Dated:- 7-6-2019 - SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessee by: Shri P.S. Shingte. Revenue by: Shri M.K. Verma. ORDER PER ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM : 1. This appeal filed by the Revenue is emanating out of the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (A) 12, Pune dated 10.09.2018 for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the grounds being inter-connected are considered together. 4. AO noticed that assessee had taken unsecured loan from M/s. Sun Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., and had paid interest of ₹ 4,69,57,184/- on which TDS was not deducted by the assessee. AO was of the view that non-deduction of TDS on payment of interest attracts provisions of Sec.40(a)(ia) of the Act and accordingly, the interest was liable to be disallowed. The assessee was asked to show as to why the interest expense not be disallowed. To the query of AO, assessee made submissions inter-alia stating that the interest paid by the assessee to M/s. Sun Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., has been considered by it in its Profit and Loss account in the return of income filed by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... IT Act after obtaining approval from the concerned authority. In response to notice issued u/s 148 dated 25.02.2016, the appellant filed return of income on 14.03.2016 declaring total income of ₹ 41,680/-. During the reassessment proceedings on being asked as to why the interest expenses of ₹ 4,69,57,184/- should not be disallowed u/s 40(a)(ia), the appellant submitted that the said expenses cannot be disallowed for non deduction of TDS since the appellant had not debited the interest expenses in the P L A/c instead the interest expenses was capitalized by adding the value of closing WIP. The appellant further contended the interest paid to M/s Sun Infrastructure Pvt. ltd. was duly accounted for in the return filed by the said ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amended provision of section 201 would apply and no disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) was warranted. The appellant in support of the contentions raised relied on the decision of Pune Tribunal in the case of ACIT vs Bhavook Chandraprakash Tripathi, ITA No.1372/PN/2013 dated 18-03-2015 and ITO vs. M/s Gaurimal Mahajan Sons vide ITA NO.1852/PN/2012 dated 06.01.2014, and of Agra Tribunal in the case of Rajiv Kumar Agarwal Vs. ACIT, ITA NO. 3371Agral2013 dated 29/0512013 as well as High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT Vs. AnsaL Land Mark Township (P.) Ltd., ITA No. 160 of 2015 dated 26/0812015. I have considered the documents placed before me. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ansal Land Mark Township (P) Ltd. (supra) held that the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 13 was clarificatory and curative in nature and was applicable retrospectively from 01.04.2005 i.e. from the period of insertion of the section 40(a)(ia). The AO is directed to delete the disallowance made u/s 40(a)(ia) of ₹ 4,69,57,184/- reducing the value of closing WIP. Ground raised by the appellant is hereby allowed. Aggrieved by the order of Ld.CIT(A), Revenue is now in appeal before me. 5. Before me, Ld.D.R. supported the order of AO and Ld.CIT(A). Ld.A.R. on the other hand submitted that in principal the appeal filed by the Revenue needs to be dismissed on account of low-tax effect. He further submitted that even on merits, Ld.CIT(A) has decided the issue in favour of the assessee by following ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
