9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (8) TMI 629X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... elated parties. From the financials of the M/s. Coastal Packagings, we find that the assessee is an individual and proprietor of M/s. Coastal Packagings and also has accepted the interest free advances outstanding as on 31.03.2014 from the assessee company where he also the Wholetime Director and further has made investment in assessee Company itself for Rs. 23.96 crores. We consider this as benefit derived by the Individual Director s in his proprietary concern where he holds 100% ownership as proprietor of M/s. Coastal Packagings. Therefore, in the case of S.A. Builders [ 2006 (12) TMI 82 - SUPREME COURT] relied on by the CIT(A) cannot be applied to the instant case. With respect to the interest free advance to M/s. Diehard Dies Pvt., Lim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to this, the correspondence with the Range Office has resulted in a delay. Further, this office was also in the process of completing formalities related to the handing and taking over of charge. The above reasons have resulted in an unavoidable delay. Thereafter the appeal papers prepared and without any further delay, the appeal filed on 02-06- 2023. 4. It is submitted that the delay in filing appeal is neither wanton nor willful, but only because of the above reasons. 5. In view of the above, it is humbly prayed that Hon'ble ITAT may condone the delay of three (3) days in filing the appeal and thus render justice. 3. On perusal of the contents of the affidavit filed by the revenue and as well as the submission of the Ld. DR, we find ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... additions made by the Assessing Officer, assessee filed an appeal before Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi. Considering the submissions made by the assessee, Ld. CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 6. Being aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi, revenue is in appeal before us by raising following grounds in its appeal:- 1. The order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi is erroneous both in law and on facts of the case. 2. Whether Ld. CIT(A) is correct in law and facts of the case, in disallowing the addition made by the assessing officer, on interest free loans advanced by the assessee company to sister concerns/related parties. 3. Whether the Ld.CIT(A) is correct in law and facts of the case, in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... de by the Assessing Officer. He therefore pleaded that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) be upheld. 10. We have heard both the sides and perused the material available on record. It is an undisputed fact that the assessee has advanced an amount of Rs. 25,97,37,842/- to M/s. Coastal Packagings and an amount of Rs. 37,92,81,359/- to M/s. Diehard Dies Pvt., Limited. The contention of the Ld. DR is that Mr. Tulasi Ramachandra Prabhu is a proprietor of M/s. Coastal Packagings and also hold substantial interest to the extent of 64% in M/s. Diehard Dies Pvt., Limited. It is the case of the Assessing Officer that assessee has made a purchase of packing material for the entire year for Rs. 1.73 Crores from M/s. Coastal Packagings, however, an amount of Rs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onclusion that can be drawn from the above working / netting of investments against the unsecured loans is that the persons managing the affairs of the assessee-company are fully aware of the implications of 14A visa-vis the provisions of section 37 and has consciously reduced the unsecured loans from investments, for the purpose of calculation of 14A in individual status and tacitly admit that the interest-bearing funds of the assessee-company are being utilized for the purposes of investments in various concerns of the substantial stake holder / Whole-time Director. 4.7 Therefore, as the assessee company has been paying interest on the loans borrowed by it and had diverted them as unsecured loans to the concerns where the Whole-time Direc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... astal Packagings and also has accepted the interest free advances of Rs. 25.97 crores outstanding as on 31.03.2014 from the assessee company where he also the Wholetime Director and further has made investment in assessee Company itself for Rs. 23.96 crores. We consider this as benefit derived by the Individual Director s in his proprietary concern where he holds 100% ownership as proprietor of M/s. Coastal Packagings. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the ratio laid down by the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of S.A. Builders (supra) relied on by the Ld.CIT(A) cannot be applied to the instant case. 12. Further, with respect to the interest free advance to M/s. Diehard Dies Pvt., Limited, no documentary evidences have been pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
