9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (8) TMI 742X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r verifying the availability of the self-owned funds with the assessee, therefore, for the said reason it had restored the matter to his file with specific directions - the order passed by the Tribunal while disposing off the appeal could not be held to be suffering from a mistake apparent from record which would render it amenable for rectification under sub-section (2) of Sec. 254 of the Act, for the reason, that the assessee holds a conviction that the same ought not to have been restored, but should have been adjudicated by the Tribunal. At this stage, we may herein clarify, that in case if the adjudication of the assessee s claim for deduction u/s 36(1)(iii) of the interest expenditure could have been possible on the basis of the facts ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a, D.R ORDER PER RAVISH SOOD, J.M: The present miscellaneous application filed by the assessee arises from the order passed by the Tribunal while disposing off its appeal, viz. Agility Logistics Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT, Range 9(1), dated 11.02.2021. As is discernible from the application, it is the claim of the assessee applicant that as the order passed by the Tribunal suffers from a mistake which is apparent from record, therefore, the same therein renders it amenable for rectification under sub-section (2) of Sec. 254 of the Act. 2. Adverting to the impugned mistake in the order, it is stated by the assessee applicant that it had vide Ground of appeal No. 3 assailed before the Tribunal disallowance of its claim for deduct ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee in the course of the proceedings before the lower authorities had furnished the details of its own funds vis- -vis borrowed funds for each of the year in which the capital advances/investments were made, and the said fact was duly recorded by the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) at Page No. 41 42 of its order passed under Sec. 144C(5), dated 18.07.2018. Accordingly, in the backdrop of the aforesaid facts, it is the claim of the assessee that the Tribunal had erred in setting aside the issue with a direction to the assessee to establish the fact that it had sufficient interest free funds available with it to justify the capital advances/investments, loosing sight of the fact that the relevant facts qua the said issue were alread ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted that no infirmity did emerge from the order passed by the Tribunal vis- -vis the adjudication of the Ground of appeal No. 3 that was raised by the assessee appellant. In order to buttress his aforesaid claim the ld. D.R took us through the relevant observations of the Tribunal at Page 35 Para 33 and Page 42 of its order, wherein after referring to the facts qua the issue in question, the Tribunal had restored the matter to the file of the A.O, with a direction, to verify as to whether or not the assessee at the relevant point of time had sufficient interest free funds available with it to justify the source of the capital advances /investments that were made in the aforesaid properties. It was submitted by the ld. D.R that as the ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ced out of such interest free funds so available with it. As observed by us hereinabove, it is the claim of the assessee that as the details regarding availability of adequate internal working capital and self- generated funds vis- -vis borrowed funds for making payments towards capital advances/investments in the properties in question were there before the DRP, therefore, there was no requirement for setting aside the matter to the file of the A.O. We are afraid that the aforesaid contention of the assessee suffers from certain infirmities, and thus, the same cannot be accepted. Insofar the reliance that has been placed by the assessee on the Chart at Page 41 of the order passed by the DRP u/s 144C(5), dated 18.07.2018, to drive home it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... adjudicated by the Tribunal. At this stage, we may herein clarify, that in case if the adjudication of the assessee s claim for deduction u/s 36(1)(iii) of the interest expenditure could have been possible on the basis of the facts borne from the record, then, the same would not have been restored by the Tribunal but would have been adjudicated. However, we are afraid that as the requisite facts that were required for adjudicating the aforesaid issue could not be gathered from the records, therefore, in all fairness and in the interest of justice the matter had been restored to the file of the A.O with specific directions. As regards the claim of the ld. A.R that the Chart reflecting the availability of self-generated funds vis- -vis borr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
