TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (6) TMI 889
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t of loan for ₹ 2,38,93,001/- as an income. 2. Because the action is being challenged on facts and Law for treating the amount of ₹ 2,00,000/- as unexplained expenditure which amount has been written off as bad debts by the debtor (Vijayanand Traders) on its own without assessee's knowledge." 3. ITA 291/CHD/2011 : In this appeal, revenue raised the following grounds: 1. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in directing AC) to verily whether in earlier years the assessee had claimed expenditure on interest on loan that was later waived off by bank, as this goes beyond the powers of Id. CIT(A) to restore or set aside the issue for verification of claim of expenditure on interest (₹ 1,95,12,686/-) in earlier years to AC),....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cannot be allowed as payment under the income from business or profession only on payment basis as per the provisions of Section 43B of the Income-tax Act and the assessee has not taxed any such interest. Therefore on non payment basis also the interest as per provision of Section 43B is not allowable." As far as capital waiver is concerned, he held same to be taxable because same was taken as cash credit loan on the basis of decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Solid Containers Ltd. V DCIT 308 ITR 417 (Bom). 5. On appeal, similar submissions were made before ld. CIT(A). He confirmed the action of AO in respect of addition on account of capital waiver because loan was taken as cash credit loan and same was utilized t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ric Ltd. 56 DTR 38, wherein it was held that waiver of loan could not be added u/s 41(1). 8. After examining rival submissions, we agree with the contention of ld. DR that words "or he may set aside" have been omitted by Finance Act 2001 w.e.f. 01.06.2001. Therefore, after that date CIT(A) has no power to set aside the order. Ld. CIT(A) initially observed that, "As regard interest portion of ₹ 1,9,12,686/-, same in my opinion is not taxable as AR has submitted that no expenditure on account of interest has ever been claimed." This clearly shows that first he gave a finding that no interest expenditure has been claimed but this finding is based on the submission of ld. AR without verification and the order was set aside for verificat....