9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (8) TMI 1206X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... deciding the same in accordance with law. Disallowance u/s. 14A - AR submitted that the assessee earned dividend income which is exempt from Income-tax and the amount used for investments yielding exempt income, was made from assessee's own funds - HELD THAT:- It is the claim of the assessee that the assessee has earned dividend income which is exempt from income tax and the funds used for investment is from its own funds. However, the assessee could not demonstrate the availability of its own funds for investment in exempt income. We, therefore, remit this issue to the files of the A.O. to examine the issue afresh and also direct the assessee to prove the availability of own funds for making investment in such exempted income yie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Commissioner of Income Tax - 2(3) in disallowing the claim of interest of ₹ 83,50,669 paid to non banking finance companies (NBFC's) by the Appellant under the provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act under the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ought to have appreciated that the interest paid by the Appellant has been offered to income tax by such NBFC's and doubly taxing the same transactions in the hands of the Appellant as well such payees are not warranted under the facts and circumstances of the case. 4. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in upholding the action of learned Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax - 2(3) in disallowance of S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... interest under section 2348 and 2340 of the Act on the facts and circumstances of the case. Further without prejudice the calculation of interest, rate and period are not discernible from the order of assessment on the facts and circumstance of the case. 10. The Appellant craves to add, alter, delete or substitute any of the grounds urged above. 11. In view of the above and other grounds as may be urged at the time of hearing of the appeal, the Appellant prays that the appeal may be allowed in the interest of justice and equity. 3. Ground No. 1 is general in nature, which does not require any adjudication. Thus, this ground is dismissed. 4. Ground No. 2 and 3 are with regard to disallowance of interest paid to non-banking ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 18/Bang/2018 (order dated 20.12.2019) held as under:- 6. Admittedly, assessee has not deducted TDS under section 194A of the act against interest paid to non banking financial companies. It is also an admitted fact that the companies to whom assessee has made payments are repeated companies like M/s. L T Finance Ltd., M/s. Bajaj Finance Ltd., M/s. Reliance Capital Ltd., M/s. India Bulls Ltd., M/s. Daimler Finance Ltd., M/s. Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd., and M/s. Tata Capital Ltd., who are regular assessee's under Income tax Act. As Ld. AR filed before us certificate issued by chartered accountant which was not filed before authorities below, it is necessary that the same is to be verified. We set aside this issue to Ld. AO for due veri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on advances made to Naveen Hotels towards purchase of land. In the assessment year under consideration, the assessee has diverted funds to the tune of ₹ 6,64,97,058 for making advances to Naveen Hotels. On the other hand, the assessee has incurred interest on borrowed funds, which was claimed as deduction. The A.O. disallowed the claim of the assessee towards interest of ₹ 66,49,705. The contention of the learned AR is that the assessee is having own funds to make investments to its sister concern, namely, Naveen Hotels and such claim of interest cannot be disallowed. The learned AR also relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Reliance Industries Limited [ (2019) 410 ITR 466 (SC)]. 15. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
