9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 497X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the property are mentioned therein. It clearly shows that the property of Andheri (East) referred above was purchased by two persons i.e. assessee and his brother. The property being commercial is not disputed. Under the given facts and circumstances of the case we are the considered view that the interest has been rightly claimed as business expenditure as it has been paid on the loan taken to purchase property for business purposes and interest expenditure has been claimed after deducting tax at source and all documentary evidence placed before us asserts this fact. We therefore, set aside the finding of the Ld. CIT(A) and allow the ground no. 2(a) raised by the assessee. - ITA No. 4188/MUM/2019 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) - - - Date ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s at ₹ 58,142/- and disallowance of interest expenditure at ₹ 1,46,785/- claimed by the assessee being paid on loan taken from his brother and co-owner Mr. Ashfaque Khan for purchasing a property for business purposes. Income assessed at ₹ 22,34,146/-. 4. Aggrieved the assessee preferred appeal before Ld. CIT(A) and partly succeeded. Now the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal raising sole issue against the findings of Ld. CIT(A) confirming the disallowance of interest expenditure of ₹ 1,46,785/- u/s 36(1)(iii) of the Act. 5. The Ld. counsel for the assessee relied on written submission filed before the lower authorities and also referred to the Paper Book dated 06.08.2021 page (1 to 51). He also submitt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... purchased is a commercial premises located at office No. 805 on the 8th floor of the building known as Jay Antriksh situated at Andheri Kurla Road, Andheri East, Mumbai. The Ld. CIT(A) also observed that the payments were made through banking channel to purchase the property. He however, raised doubt that why the property has been shown under the head Investment and not being shown as a fixed asset. The Ld. CIT(A) also raised concern that why the assessee has not produced any documentary evidence to demonstrate that Mr. Ashfaque Ahmed Khan is the proprietar of M/s Lucky Enterprises to whom interest has been paid. 10. We however, find force in the contentions of Ld. counsel for the assessee. We observe that the assessee s books of accoun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onsidered view that the interest of ₹ 1,46,785/- has been rightly claimed as business expenditure as it has been paid on the loan taken to purchase property for business purposes and interest expenditure has been claimed after deducting tax at source and all documentary evidence placed before us asserts this fact. We therefore, set aside the finding of the Ld. CIT(A) and allow the ground no. 2(a) raised by the assessee. As regards the ground No. 2b the same becomes infructuous as we have already deleted the disallowance of interest of ₹ 1,46,250/- u/s 36(1)(iii) of the Act. Other grounds are general in nature. 13. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 31/08/2021. - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
