9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 1083X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the ground that the assessee has advanced a loan of Rs. 2 crores on 16.8.2007 to one M/s K.S. Consupro India Pvt. Ltd.. The amount of Rs. 1,95,00,000/- was received by the assessee on various dates. It was observed by the Assessing Officer that the assessee was having secured and unsecured loans. The amount was advanced to the above party free of interest. When confronted, the assessee accepted that no interest has been charged. The assessee's counsel requested that the interest @ 9% per annum should be charged on the deposit and unsecured loan during the year not exceeding 9%. The detailed working of calculation was given by the Assessing Officer in the Assessing Officer. The matter was carried to the learned CIT(A) and the learned CIT(A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... siness purposes, interest is to be charged from the above party and the Assessing Officer and the learned CIT(A) are justified in disallowing the same. 6. I have heard the rival contentions. During the course of hearing, the learned counsel for the assessee was asked to provided copies of advance given to M/s K.S. Consupro India Pvt. Ltd. The assessee was directed to give evidence whether this amount was given for business expediency or not and if it is a business transaction, the evidence that this advance was given for business purposes. The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that this loan was given for purchase of goods and the purchase was not finalised, therefore, the amount was received back by the assessee for which no inte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... poses. During the course of hearing, the learned counsel for the assessee has cited the decision of ITAT, Indore Bench, in the case of M/s Kehems Engineering Pvt. Ltd.; ITA No. 602/Ind/2014 but in that case the assessee has made the interest in sister concern. Similarly, in the case of Bombay High Court decision cited by the learned counsel for the assessee in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd.; 178 taxman 135(Bom) the assessee had made investment in sister concern for which he has not charged any interest. As such, the facts of these cases are distinguishable with the facts of the present case. The peculiar facts of this case prove that the assessee has not been able to substantiate its claim that the advance was given on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessee has shown pressing expenses of Rs. 24.25 lacs. The Assessing Officer on estimate disallowed Rs. 1,25,000/- i.e. 5% of the expenses and added the same to total income of the assessee. On appeal, learned CIT(A) granted relief of Rs. 25,000/- and restricted the disallowance to Rs. 1 lac. Now the assessee is in appeal. 11. Before me, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the disallowance made by the authorities below is not justified. On the other hand, the learned DR justified the orders of the authorities below. 12. After considering the arguments of the parties, I am of the view that the disallowance is not called for in this case. I, therefore, delete the same. 13. So far as ground no. 4 regarding maintaining the di ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
