TMI Blog2021 (8) TMI 903X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... herein we find the facts and circumstances arose in A.Y. 2011-12 and in the year under consideration i.e. 2012-13 are identical. Respondent-Revenue did not bring on record any view contrary to the view taken by the Coordinate Bench of Tribunal in assessee's own case for A.Y. 2011-12 and in view of the same, we find the order of CIT(A) is not justified. The finding of Co-ordinate Bench of Tribunal rendered in A.Y. 2011-12 vide its order dated 27-01-2017 [ 2017 (1) TMI 1758 - ITAT PUNE] in assessee's own case is applicable to the facts and circumstances for A.Y. 2012-13. Thus, the addition made by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A) is deleted and the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed. - ITA No. 2536/PUN/2017 - - - Dated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... finance cost of ₹ 59,36,048/-. The AO asked the assessee to explain as to why interest paid on borrowed funds to the extent of interest free advances given to M/s. Sentosa Resort Pvt. Ltd. should not be disallowed at 12%. It was explained that the assessee is a major shareholder in the said M/s. Sentosa Resort Pvt. Ltd. and the loans were given to the said concern due to business exigency. The said interest free loans given to M/s. Sentosa Resort Pvt. Ltd. from time to time to cater their need of capital expenditure. It was a strategic, judicious business decision to from the company along with person having experience to conduct such business and the investments were partly as interest free advance and partly in the form of fully pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for A.Y. 2011-12 is not applicable for the year under consideration i.e. A.Y. 2012-13. The ld. AR placed on record the order for A.Y. 2011-12 from Page No. 4 to 18 in the paper book. The ld. DR vehemently argued the said decision of ITAT for A.Y. 2011-12 is not applicable for the year under consideration for the reason that the CIT(A) held clearly there is a change of facts compared to earlier years and the year under consideration. We note that the Co-ordinate Bench of Tribunal discussed the issue in detail from Para Nos. 4 to 7, wherein we find the facts and circumstances arose in A.Y. 2011-12 and in the year under consideration i.e. 2012-13 are identical. The Respondent-Revenue did not bring on record any view contrary to the view taken ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
