Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2015 (4) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (4) TMI 1174 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURTAddition u/s 2(22)(e) - Held that:- The first question has already been answered in favour of the respondent-assessee in this very appeal, by the order of the Division Bench [2015 (2) TMI 1233 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] as held that as the assessee has proved business expediency the advance is not covered by Section 2(22)(e) of the Act. Disallowance u/s 40A(2)(b) - Held that:- The second question raised is not a substantial question of law. It is purely a question of fact. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal rightly held that the mere fact that the assessee obtained loans @ 12% per annum does not believe the assessee's contention that the loans are from the family, which are at 15% per annum. It was a question of appreciation of fact and thus, no question of law arises. Disallowance u/s 36(1)(iii) - proportionate interest on borrowed funds used for capital work in progress - Held that:- Admittedly, a question of fact, namely, as to whether the amounts borrowed were used for capital work in progress. Even in the previous years, the assessee's case has been upheld.
|