Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2013 (7) TMI 321

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... o the interest of the Revenue - No justifiable ground to hold that there was no error in the order of the Assessing Officer to justify the invoking of the jurisdiction under Section 263 - Decided in favour of Revenue. whether the amount advanced was a measure of commercial expediency - Held that:- authorities and the Courts should examine the purpose for which the assessee advanced the money and what the sister concern did with the money - in considering the question that the borrowed amount was not utilized by the assessee in its own business but had been advanced as interest free loan to its sister concern is not relevant, what is relevant is whether the amount was advanced as a measure of commercial expediency and not from the point o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e transaction of the assessee with Renowned Auto Products Manufacturers Ltd. and whether the loan advanced was for the purpose of the assessee's business, the Commissioner called upon the the assessee to show cause as to why the order of assessment should not be set aside or modified. 3. After hearing the assessee, the Commissioner passed an order directing the Officer to look into the aspect of commercial expediency which compelled the assessee to advance a sum of Rs.12,69,21,989/-. The Commissioner pointed out that the amount advanced was more than 46% of its entire liability towards the secured loan. In his proceedings, the Commissioner pointed out that the company had acquired 83% of the shares of Renowned Auto Products Manufacturers .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of commercial expediency, but only to divert funds was however negatived by the Tribunal by pointing out to the rehabilitation scheme framed by the BIFR in the case of Renowned Auto Products Manufacturers Ltd., the sister Company. The Tribunal held that the advance was not given by the company on its own, but was under the order of rehabilitation passed by BIFR. Since the assessee had acted prudently in its own interest in the light of the investment made in the subsidiary company, the claim was allowable as a deduction. Thus the appeal of the assessee was allowed. Aggrieved by this, the present appeal has been filed by the Revenue. 6. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Revenue pointed out that as the order of the Company Law Boar .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... and considered the material placed on record. 9. In order to find out whether the issue on the amount given to the sister concern was a matter of consideration by the Officer at the original assessment stage, this Court directed the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Revenue to get the assessment records. Accordingly, the same were produced today before this Court. It is seen from the records produced that there is no discussion at all on this aspect. Even though the balance sheet clearly pointed out that the loan was advanced to the sister concern, the issue on the borrowed money given to the sister concern being not a subject matter of consideration by the Assessing Officer, apart from taking other facts into consideration, name .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... y, the Revenue had not raised any question of law on this. Even though on the aspect of jurisdiction, the Revenue succeeds, yet, the further question on the merits being a pure question of fact and rightly not raised, we do not find, any useful purpose would be achieved in setting aside the order of the Tribunal and further remanding the matter. In the circumstances, except for holding that the Revenue is justified in its plea in invoking jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Act, we do not think, the order calls for any interference to remand the matter. 11. In the decision reported in [2007] 288 ITR 1 (SC) (S.A.Builders Ltd. Vs. CIT), the Apex Court pointed out that in considering the question as to whether the amount advanced was a mea .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates