TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 208X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has not been disputed by the AO. AO has merely made the addition on the ground that the assessee has utilized sizable amount out of the secured loans to be given as interest free advances to his family members, related concerns and for acquiring property for their personal needs. As discussed above and following the decision rendered by the coordinate Bench of the Tribunal for AY 2008-09 and 2009-10, we are of the considered view that the ld. CIT (A) has rightly deleted the addition after scrutinizing the facts - decided against revenue. Addition on account of Business Promotion Expenses - Held that:- Incurrence of expenses has not been disputed by the Revenue but they have guess-worked the personal elements in the expenses incurred b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r unrelated activities. 2. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in law in reducing the addition made by the AO on account of Business Promotion Expenses from ₹ 39,49,797/- to ₹ 9,87,449/- without appreciating the facts of the case mentioned in the assessment order. 2. Briefly stated the facts necessary for adjudication of the controversy at hand are : the assessee is engaged in the corporate tax and business advisory services having income from house property, income from profession and income from other sources. During the year under assessment, assessee debited interest expenses of ₹ 3,02,49,825/- on account of interest on property loans, ₹ 5,26,473/- on account of inte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bove awards have been claimed as business promotion expenses, so part of the business promotion expenses claimed by the assessee are certainly personal in nature and thereby disallowed 20% of the aforesaid expenses amounting to ₹ 39,49,797/- towards personal in nature and thereby made addition thereof to the total income of the assessee. 4. The assessee carried the matter before the ld. CIT (A) by way of an appeal who has partly allowed the appeal. Feeling aggrieved, the Revenue has come up before the Tribunal by way of filing the present appeal. 5. We have heard the ld. Authorized Representatives of the parties to the appeal, gone through the documents relied upon and orders passed by the revenue authorities below in the light ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8. When it is not in dispute that the AO has made addition on account of disallowance of interest by following the earlier years assessment orders which have now been over-turned by the coordinate Bench of the Tribunal by deleting the disallowance of interest expenditure, the facts of the case at hand are identical. Operative part of the decision rendered by the coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in assessee s own case (supra) is as under :- 18. Now the department is in appeal. The ld. DR strongly supported the order of the AO and reiterated the observations made in the assessment order dated 31.12.2010. It was a housing loan but the building constructed was not for the business purposes. Therefore, the interest paid on the said lo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... diversion of those secured loans. Therefore, it cannot be said that the assessee diverted interest bearing funds towards interest free advances or loans particularly when the assessee had sufficient credit balance in his capital account to the tune of ₹ 21.76 crores. 21. On a similar issue the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs Ms. Sushma Kapoor (2009) 319 ITR 299 (supra) approved the factual findings given by the ld. CIT (A) which were confirmed by the ITAT by observing as under:- The Commissioner of Income-lax (Appeals), in appeal apart from other findings recorded a categorical finding that the amount of advances made to the parties were paid as advances and in any case they were given ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e for business purposes. Assessee proved to have taken the secured loans for specific purpose and their utilization has not been disputed by the AO. AO has merely made the addition on the ground that the assessee has utilized sizable amount out of the secured loans to be given as interest free advances to his family members, related concerns and for acquiring property for their personal needs. 10. In view of what has been discussed above and following the decision rendered by the coordinate Bench of the Tribunal for AY 2008-09 and 2009-10, we are of the considered view that the ld. CIT (A) has rightly deleted the addition after scrutinizing the facts and there is no scope to interfere into the findings returned by the ld. CIT (A). So, gr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
