TMI Blog2013 (6) TMI 332X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... open to disallowances. The assessee has not demonstrated as to the relatable interest bearing loans and the manner of appropriation of the said loans. In the absence of the same, the only presumption is that the said loans from Kotak Mahendre Bank and DCB are utilized for lending to the said three parties for non business purpose. Ratio of S.A. Builders vs. CIT case (2006 (12) TMI 82 - SUPREME COURT) is relevant here and the advances of Rs. 9.33 lacs were given outside the purview of the established concept of 'commercial expediency'. Thus disapproving the estimation method adopted by the CIT(A) in making disallowance restricting to Rs 93,300/-. Therefore, restricting the disallowance to Rs. 38,529/- should meet both ends of justice - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... proceedings before the first appellate authority, after considering the submissions made by the assessee, CIT (A) partly allowed the assessee's appeal. Not satisfied with the decision of the CIT (A), the assessee filed the present appeal before the Tribunal by raising the above mentioned grounds. As evident from the ground raised before us, sustaining of the addition of Rs. 93,300/- out of Rs 1,31,441/- in respect of interest paid is the bone of contention before us. 5. During the proceedings before us, Ld Counsel for the assessee mentioned that the assessee undisputedly gave loans amounting to Rs. 9,33,000/- to three of his friends namely (i) Sri Kastrichand Pvt. Ltd. (Rs. 3,83,000/-) (ii) Mahesh Ahuja (Rs. 4,50,000/-) and (iii) Advance ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment Co-op. Bank, whose loans may be some indirect nexus to the impugned interest free advances of Rs. 9.33 lacs. He however, mentioned that he does not have cash flow particulars to substantiate the claim that the said advances were given our of assessee's interest free funds. 6. On the other hand, Ld DR relied on the orders of the Revenue Authorities. 7. We have heard both the parties and perused the orders of the Revenue Authorities as well as the paper book filed before us. It is an admitted fact that the assessee gave Rs. 9.33 lacs loan / advances to three of his friends namely i) Sri Kastrichand Pvt. Ltd. (Rs. 3,83,000/-) (ii) Mahesh Ahuja (Rs. 4,50,000/-) and (iii) Advance Samata Anand (Rs. 1,00,000/-). It is also a fact that out ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
