Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (10) TMI 251 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT

2016 (10) TMI 251 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT - TMI - Disallowance of interest - addition u/s 36(1)(iii) - whether transactions are arising out of ‘commercial expediency’ & ‘business exigencies’Held that:- Tribunal upheld the Assessing Officer’s finding that the unsecured loans of ₹ 588.79 lacs were not available to the assessee. It is difficult to understand the basis for this finding as the Tribunal has not considered the assessee’s records which the assessee contends indicate the cont .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t would make all the difference to the assessee’s case. It is not very clear whether this was so stated to the CIT (Appeals) and to the Tribunal or not. - In the facts and circumstance of this case, the ends of justice, however, would be met by affording the appellant an opportunity of having the matter re-heard before the Tribunal.The matter is remanded to the Tribunal for a fresh decision after affording the appellant an opportunity of being heard. - ITA-2-2016 (O&M) - Dated:- 20-9-2016 - .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

facts & circumstances of the case, u/s 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, can there be disallowance of interest while the interest free money has been advanced for interest free purposes, which both transactions are arising out of commercial expediency & business exigencies hence, none nexus, character, purpose for diversion pursuant to CIT Vs Abhishek Industries Ltd. (2006) 286 ITR 1 P&H? II. Whether on the true and correct interpretation of Section 57(iii) of the Income Tax Ac .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s that the matter had gone by default on account of the assessee not having pursued the matter seriously. It is apparent that the order did not take into consideration the written submissions which were filed prior thereto. The written submissions were filed on 29.11.2012 and the order of the CIT (Appeals) is dated 13.12.2012. The assessee s authorized representative s presence has been marked in the order. It is difficult to understand why the submissions were not considered. On merits, the CIT .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version