TMI Blog2017 (10) TMI 1537X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /s Abdul Wahid Tanneries Pvt. Ltd. - this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the assessee-partnership firm cannot be construed either as registered shareholder or as beneficial shareholder. Therefore, the assessee cannot be assessed under Section 2(22)(e) - At the best, it may be considered in the hands of the individual partner who is the shareholder in the company - addition made by the AO under Section 2(22)(e) of the Act is deleted. - Decided in favour of assessee. Disallowance of interest on the delayed payment of sales tax - HELD THAT:- Delayed payment of interest is compensatory in nature, therefore, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that for delayed payment of sales tax, the interest paid by the assessee cannot be disallowed while computing the total income. Interest on the TDS amount - assessee itself disallowed the interest on the TDS amount and AO without verifying the computation, disallowed the same once again - HELD THAT:- Since the assessee claims that the interest on TDS was already disallowed, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the Assessing Officer needs to verify the same. Accordingly, the orders of both the authorities bel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rship firm was purchasing finished leather from M/s Abdul Wahid Tanneries Pvt. Ltd. for manufacturing shoe and shoe uppers regularly. During the financial year ending 31.03.2012, according to the Ld. counsel, M/s T. Abdul Wahid Co. owed to M/s Abdul Wahid Tanneries Limited a sum of ₹ 6,31,49,548/- towards supply of leather. In order to maintain the working capital ratio, a sum of ₹ 2 Crores was transferred from sundry creditors to trade running account of M/s Abdul Wahid Tanneries Pvt. Ltd. as a deferred liability which was shown in the balance sheet under the head Unsecured Loan . According to the Ld. counsel, there was no cash transaction between the assessee-partnership firm and M/s Abdul Wahid Tanneries Pvt. Ltd. The amount outstanding for supply of leather was shown as unsecured loan. Therefore, according to the Ld. counsel, it cannot be construed either as advance or otherwise. It is a commercial transaction between the assessee-firm and the company, therefore, according to the Ld. counsel, the provisions of Section 2(22)(e) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') is not applicable at all. 3. The Ld.counsel for the assessee further submitted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rship firm? 6. We have carefully gone through the provisions of Section of Section 2(22)(e) of the Act which reads as follows:- 2(22) dividend includes (a) . . . . . . . . . . . . . (b) . . . . . . . . . . . . . (c) . . . . .. . . . . . . . . (d) . . . . . . . . . . . .. (e) any payment by a company, not being a company in which the public are substantially interested, of any sum (whether as representing a part of the assets of the company or otherwise) made after the 31st day of May, 1987, by way of advance or loan to a shareholder, being a person who is the beneficial owner of shares (not being shares entitled to a fixed rate of dividend whether with or without a right to participate in profits) holding not less than ten per cent. of the voting power, or to any concern in which such shareholder is a member or a partner and in which he has a substantial interest (hereafter in this clause referred to as the said concern) or any payment by any such company on behalf, or for the individual benefit, of any such shareholder, to the extent to which the company in either case possesses accumulated profit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icer without verifying the computation, disallowed the same once again. Therefore, it needs to be verified. 14. We have heard Ms. S. Vijayaprabha, the Ld. Departmental Representative also. Since the assessee claims that the interest on TDS was already disallowed, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the Assessing Officer needs to verify the same. Accordingly, the orders of both the authorities below are set aside and the issue of disallowance of ₹ 68,538/- towards interest on TDS amount is remitted back to the file of the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer shall re-examine the matter and decide the issue in accordance with law, after giving a reasonable opportunity to the assessee. 15. The next issue arises for consideration is disallowance of ₹ 92,116/- being the interest paid on credit card. 16. Shri G. Baskar, the Ld.counsel for the assessee, submitted that this amount was paid only for the purpose of business, therefore, there cannot be any disallowance. 17. On the contrary, Ms. S. Vijayaprabha, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that it cannot be said that the credit card was used only for the purpose of business. Since p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
