TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 1277X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es also made interest-free. - Decided in favour of assessee. Disallowance on account of investments in shops and pent-houses - assessee could not give any proof that such immovable assets would be used for business purpose - ITAT deleted the disallowance - Held that:- The respondent-assessee is in the business inter alia of making investments in shares and property. We are entirely in agreement that merely because the assessee has given out some of its properties on rent, it does not lead to the inference that investments in other properties are not for business purposes. We are unable to see why such a view has been taken. The assessee can always give out its properties on rent and acquire further properties towards investment.- Decided ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt year 2008-09. 2. The appellant contends that the following substantial questions of law arise : (i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the hon'ble Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in upholding the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) in which disallowance of proportionate interest at ₹ 23,54,722 under section 36(i)(iii) was deleted, ignoring the facts that no proof of commercial expediency and business purpose was provided. (ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the hon'ble Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in deleting the disallowance, accepting the arguments of the assessee that it had enough interest-free funds in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was deleted by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). (v) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the hon'ble Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in upholding the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) in which disallowance under section 14A read with rule 8D made at ₹ 1,15,59,178 on account of expenses incurred for making investments in mutual funds and equity funds was deleted, thereby ignoring the provisions of rule 8D(2) of the Income-tax Rules as well as the fact that the decision of the hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Winsome Textile Industries Ltd. [2009] 319 ITR 204 (P H) is relevant for the assessment year 2004-05 whereas rule 8D has been insert ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rest- free funds that were actually advanced as interest-free advances is without substance. Money has no identity. So long it is established that the interest-free advances are made by an assessee who has adequate free reserves, it is sufficient to establish that the amounts advanced interest-free cannot be added to the assessee's income. It was not contended that the interest-free advances exceeded the interest-free funds available with the appellant. Nor was it established that a particular advance received was in turn advanced by the assessee interest-free. Questions Nos. 1 to 3 are, therefore, answered against the appellant. Re : Question No. 4 5. As found by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to a query raised by the Assessing Officer, the assessee categorically stated that the investments in shares were old investments which had been made out of the capital and outstanding reserves of the company and that no separate amount had been borrowed for making the said investments. It further stated that no special expenditure was incurred for earning this dividend income. 8. The entire record of the assessee was available. The assessee cannot establish the negative. If the Assessing Officer disbelieved the assessee, it was for him to have established the same from the records or otherwise. The Assessing Officer has not even considered this assertion expressly made by the assessee. The Assessing Officer's conclusion that the as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
