Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2016 (8) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (8) TMI 373 - HC - Income TaxAddition on account of capital investment - Held that:- Whether these amounts formed part of ₹ 2.45 crores or not is a question of fact. The assessee has not adduced any evidence to establish the same. The manner in which the Assessing Officer has came to the figure of ₹ 2.45 crores cannot be held to be perverse or irrational. His refusal to deduct the amounts as claimed by the assessee from this amount cannot be said to be perverse or irrational either. The Tribunal indeed speculated by reducing the undisclosed investment at ₹ 1.50 crores and the addition of ₹ 55.01 lacs to about ₹ 34.65 lacs. However, the Tribunal speculated in favour of the assessee. The assessee can hardly be aggrieved by the speculation in his favour. No substantial question of law.- Decided against assessee Disallowance of interest under section 36(1)(iii) - amount advanced to the employees of the Appellant by terming the said advancement of money as not for business purposes? - Held that:- The assessee advanced amounts without interest to his sister concern and to the employees. It was found that there were no business transactions with the sister concern. Commercial expediency was not established. As far as the employees are concerned, a sum of ₹ 10 lacs is alleged to have been advanced to him. Only a credit entry in his account was found. The amount was advanced for the purpose of constructing a house. There was no evidence that the money was infact given for construction of a house. Relief as regards supply of goods to one of the sister concern was partly granted. Relief as regards other transactions warrants no interference. It was found as a matter of fact that there was no commercial expediency. - Decided against assessee
|