ITO, Kurukshetra V. M/s Subhash Rice Mills, Kurukshetra

ITA 131/CHANDI/2009

• Counselvise Citation: 13121514 RSA 2009
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 10 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-12-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 01-12-2011
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 11-02-2009
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: JAI SHREE SHARMA
• Assessee Lawyers: S K MUKHI
• Keywords: Proportionate interest; Commercial expediency

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH B CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI H.L.KARWA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MEHAR SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 236/DEL/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06 M/S SUBHASH RICE MILLS, V ACIT, SADHU MANDI KURUKSHETRA. KURUKSHETRA. PAN-------- & ITA NO. 131/CHD/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005-06 ITO, WARD -1, V M/S SUBHASH RICE MILLS, KURUKSHETRA. SADHU MANDI, KURUKSHETRA. PAN: ------- (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S.K.MUKHI DEPARTMENT BY: SMT.JAISHREE SHARMA DATE OF HEARING : 01.12.2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 19.12.2011 ORDER PER MEHAR SINGH, AM THE PRESENT TWO APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND T HE REVENUE RESPECTIVELY ARE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 21 .11.2008 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) KARNAL U/S 250(6) OF THE I NCOME-TAX ACT,1961 (IN SHORT 'THE ACT') FOR THE ASSESSMENT YE AR 2005-06. 2. IN ASSESSEE'S APPEAL (ITA NO.236/DEL/2009), THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD. ACIT(APPEALS) IS AGAI NST LAW AND FACTS. 2 2. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT, THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN CONFIRMING DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST OF RS.175137/- IN RESPECT OF ALLEGED INTEREST FREE ADVANCES TO M/S JP TRADING CO. CHEEKA, M/S SHIV SHANKAR RICE MILLS, KARNAL AND M/S SAPNA BRICKS VILLAGE MATHANA AMOUNTING TO RS.13,50,000/- FOR NON BUSINESS CONSIDERATION IS ALTOGETHER ARBITRARY, ILLEGAL AND UNCALLED FOR. 3. IN THE COURSE OF PRESENT APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, LD. 'AR' CONTENDED THAT DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST OF RS.1,75, 137/- IN RESPECT OF INTEREST FREE ADVANCES TO M/S J.P.TRADIN G CO., CHEEKA, M/S SHIV SHANKAR RICE MILLS, KARNAL AND M/S SAPNA BRICKS, VILLAGE MATHANA IN RESPECT OF INTEREST AMOU NTING TO RS.13,50,000/-, FOR NON-BUSINESS PURPOSE IS BAD IN LAW. IT WAS CONTENDED BY THE LD. 'AR' THAT THESE ADVANCES WERE MADE FOR BUSINESS TRANSACTIONS FOR THE PURCHASE OF RICE AND BRICKS AND CONSEQUENTLY, THE SAME CANNOT BE TREATED AS INTERES T FREE ADVANCES WITHOUT ANY COMMERCIAL EXPEDIENCIES. 4. THE LD. 'DR' PLACED RELIANCE ON THE ORDERS OF TH E LOWER AUTHORITIES. 5. WE HAVE CAREFULLY PERUSED THE FACTS OF THE CASE, RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND THE RELEVANT AVAILABLE RECORD. PER USAL OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER REVEALS THAT THE AO HAS DISALLOWED INTEREST OF RS.2,65,181/- IN RESPECT OF SIX PARTIES ON THE GROU ND THAT THE EXPLANATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS NOT CONVINCING BUT SELF- SERVING. BEFORE THE AO, IT WAS CONTENDED BY THE AS SESSEE THAT THESE ADVANCES WERE MADE TO SUCH FIRMS FOR PURCHASE OF RICE BUT THEY HAVE NOT SUPPLIED THE GOODS TO THE ASSESSEE AN D HENCE 3 BEING COMMERCIAL TRANSACTIONS, NO DISALLOWANCE OF I NTEREST CAN BE MADE. 6. THE LD. CIT(A) HELD THAT ADVANCES IN RESPECT OF M/S HANS RAJ MULAKH RAJ, KURUKSHETRA, M/S RAM CHAND ISHWAR C HAND AND M/S DEVI DAYAL SACHIN KUMAR ARE IN THE NATURE O F ADVANCES MADE IN THE NORMAL COURSE OF BUSINESS AND CONSEQUENTLY, FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF S.A.BUILDERS V CIT 288 ITR 1 ( S.C), DISALLOWANCE IN RESPECT OF SUCH PARTIES WAS DELETED . HOWEVER, LD. CIT(A) UPHELD THE DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST IN R ESPECT OF M/S J.P.TRADING CO., M/S SHIV SHANKAR RICE MILLS AND M/ S SAPNA BRICKS. THUS, PARTIAL RELIEF WAS GRANTED TO THE AS SESSEE. 7. THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A) ARE REPRODUCED HE REUNDER: I HAVE CONSIDERED THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE. IN THE CASE OF ADVANC ES GIVEN TO M/S HANS RAJ MULAK RAJ, KURUKSHETRA, M/S R AM CHAND ISHWAR CHAND AND M/S DEVI DAYAL SACHIN KUMAR MENTIONED AT 51. NO. D,E AND F IN THE REPLY OF THE ASSESSEE, IT IS CLEAR THAT ASSESSEE HAS REGULAR BUS INESS DEALINGS WITH THESE PARTIES AND RICE/PADDY HAVE BEE N PURCHASED/SOLD TO THESE PARTIES AND THE ADVANCES GI VEN OR PAYMENT OUTSTANDING ARE IN THE NORMAL COURSE OF BUSINESS, THEREFORE NO DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST CAN BE MADE AGAINST THESE INTEREST FREE ADVANCES BECAUSE S AME ARE COVERED BY THE DECISION OF HON'BLE SUPREME COUR T IN THE CASE OF SA BUILDERS V CIT 288 ITR 1 (S.C). WHER EAS IN THE CASE OF JP TRADING CO. ADVANCE OF RS.3,50,000/- NO NORMAL TRADING OR BUSINESS TRANSACTIONS HAVE BEEN S HOWN WITH THIS PARTY. SIMILARLY IN THE CASE OF M/S SHIV SHANKAR RICE MILLS, ADVANCE RS.5,00,000/-, NO NORMAL TRADIN G OR BUSINESS TRANSACTIONS HAVE BEEN SHOWN AND SIMILARLY IN THE CASE OF M/S SAPNA BRICKS, ADVANCE RS.5,00,000/- FOR 4 PURCHASE OF BRICKS HAVE BEEN CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN G IVEN, WHEREAS ASSESSEE IS NOT IN THE BUSINESS OF BRICKS, THEREFORE IT CANNOT BE SAID TO BE ADVANCE GIVEN IN THE NORMAL COURSE OF BUSINESS, THEREFORE PROPORTIONATE INTEREST DISALLOWANCE AGAINST ADVANCE TO THESE THRE E PARTIES MENTIONED AT S.NO. A, B AND C OF THE ASSESS EE'S REPLY IS REQUIRED TO BE MADE IN VIEW OF THE HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT DECISION IN THE CASE OF M /S ABHISHEK INDUSTRIES LTD. V CIT 286 ITR 1 (P&H), THE REFORE, PROPORTIONATE DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST ON ACCOUNT O F INTEREST FREE ADVANCES TO THE EXTENT OF INTEREST FR EE ADVANCES OF RS.13,50,000/- IS CONFIRMED AND THE BAL ANCE IS DELETED AND AO IS DIRECTED TO ACCORDINGLY RECALC ULATE THE DISALLOWANCE. IN RESULT, THE GROUND OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED. 8. LD. 'AR' REFERRED TO PAGE NO.87 OF THE PAPER BOO K AND CONTENDED THAT NECESSARY CONFIRMATION IN THE CASE O F M/S SHIV SHANKAR RICE MILLS HAS BEEN FILED AND A PERUSAL OF THE SAME REVEALS THAT M/S SHIV SHANKAR RICE MILLS HAS CATEGO RICALLY INDICATED THAT THE ADVANCES WERE MADE FOR THE PURPO SE OF PURCHASE OF RICE. THEREFORE, THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE AO AND CONFIRMED BY THE CIT(A) FALLS IN THE CATEGORY O F PARTIES IN RESPECT OF WHICH DISALLOWANCE OF SUCH INTEREST WAS DELETED BY THE CIT(A). IN VIEW OF THIS, FOLLOWING THE DECISIO N OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF SA BUILDERS (SUPRA), T HE TRANSACTION PERTAINS TO HAVE BEEN UNDERTAKEN IN THE NORMAL COURSE OF BUSINESS ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE. HEN CE, IT IS A CASE OF BUSINESS OR COMMERCIAL EXPEDIENCY AND NO SUCH DI SALLOWANCE CAN BE MADE OR UPHELD. THEREFORE, ADDITION MADE BY THE CIT(A) IN RESPECT OF THIS PARTY IS DELETED. 5 9. LD. 'AR' MERELY STATED THAT SIMILAR CONFIRMATORY LETTER HAS BEEN FILED IN RESPECT OF REMAINING TWO PARTIES AND REFERRED TO VARIOUS RELEVANT PAPERS OF THE PAPER BOOK. HOWEVER , ON PERUSAL OF THE SAID REFERRED PAPERS OF THE PAPER BOOK, IT I S FOUND THAT SUCH CONFIRMATIONS WERE IN THE NATURE OF COPY OF AC COUNT ONLY. LD. 'AR' SUBMITTED THAT NECESSARY EVIDENCE IN RESPE CT OF SUCH PARTIES IN THE FORM OF CONFIRMATORY LETTERS WOULD B E FILED TO SUPPORT THE ISSUE. THEREFORE, WE ARE OF THE CONSID ERED OPINION THAT THE ISSUE IN RESPECT OF THE REMAINING TWO PART IES VIZ SAPNA BRICKS AND J.P.TRADING COMPANY ARE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR THE PURPOSE OF MAKING DETAILED INVESTIGATION S AND ADJUDICATING THE ISSUE AFRESH, AS PER LAW, AFTER PR OVIDING PROPER AND REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASS ESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO RENDER NECESSARY COOPERATION, IN T HE DISPOSAL OF THE CASES. 10. APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED, AS IN DICATED ABOVE. ITA NO. 131/CHD/2009 11. IN THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE, THE REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.3,88,800/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF SUPPRE SSED YIELD OF RICE BRAN, NAKU AND KAMMU AS THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN LESS PRODUCTION OF 810 QTLS. 2. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.2,03,000/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF SUPPRE SSED YIELD OF RICE AS THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN THE PADDY H USK LOWER THAN 18% AS PER LINE OF THIS BUSINESS. 3. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.59,018/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNDER VALUATION OF CLOSING STOCK OF PADDY HUSK AS THE ASS ESSEE 6 HAS FURNISHED NO REASONS FOR THE LOWER VALUATION OF CLOSING OF PADDY HUSK. 4. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.1,50,300/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF SUPPRE SSED SALE HUSK AS THE ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHED NO REASONS SUPPRESSION OF SALE OF HUSK AND USE OF HUSK IN FUD & LIPAI. 5. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.90,044/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST AS THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT GIVEN ANY REASON AS TO WHY INT EREST BEARING FUNDS WERE ADVANCED TO THESE CONCERNS WITHO UT INTEREST. 6. THAT THE APPELLANT CARVES LEAVE TO ADD, AMEND OR DELETE THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL OR AT THE TIME OF HEAR ING OF APPEAL. 12. IN GROUND NO.1, THE REVENUE CHALLENGED THE DELE TION OF ADDITION OF RS.3,88,800/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF SUPPRE SSED RICE BRAN, NAKU AND KAMMU. 13. WE HAVE CAREFULLY PERUSED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS , FACTS OF THE CASE AND RELEVANT AVAILABLE RECORD. THE AO NOT BEING SATISFIED WITH THE EXPLANATION MADE ADDITION OF RS. 3,88,800/- ON ACCOUNT OF SUPPRESSED PRODUCTION OF RICE BRAN, N AKKU AND KAMMU BY TAKING THE PRODUCTION OF RICE, NAKU AND KA MMU @ 8.5% AND APPLYING A RATE OF RS.480/- PER QTL. LD. CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT THE AO HAS NOT REJECTED THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT WHICH WERE AUDITED ONE AND NO PATENT DEFECTS WERE F OUND IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT WITH A VIEW TO DISLODGING BY DISPL ACING THE BOOK VERSION. IT WAS ALSO OBSERVED BY THE LD. CIT(A ) THAT MARGINAL DECLINE IN THE OVERALL YIELD IS OF NO SIGN IFICANCE, THEREFORE THE IMPUGNED ADDITION WAS DELETED. 7 14. WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THERE IS NO INFIRMIT Y IN THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) HENCE THE SAME ARE UPHELD. HOWEVER, THE FINDINGS OF THE CIT(A) AS CONTAINED IN PARA 6 ARE REPRODUCED HEREUNDER : I HAVE CONSIDERED THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE. AS PER THE CHART AND DETAILS GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE, THE YIELD OF RICE HA S INCREASED AS COMPARED TO A.Y. 2004-05 FROM 64.91 TO 65.10 BUT THERE IS A MARGINAL FALL IN PRODUCTION OF RICE BRAN, 5.83% TO 4.97% AND SIMILARLY NAKKU FROM 0.70% TO 0.62% AND OVERALL YIELD MARGINALLY DECLINED FROM 7. 44% IN A.Y. 2004-05 TO 70.69% IN A.Y. 2005-06, THEREFOR E THERE IS A MARGINAL DECLINE IN THE OVERALL YIELD OF RICE AND BYE-PRODUCTS WHICH IS NEGLIGIBLE. THE YIELD OF RICE AND BYE-PRODUCTS DEPENDS UPON THE QUALITY OF PADDY AND QUALITY AND STANDARD OF MACHINES OR POLISHER, THEREFORE THE YIELD MAY VARY FROM YEAR TO YEAR AND FROM ASSESSEE TO ASSESSEE BECAUSE OF VARIOUS QUALITY OF RICE AND VARIOUS QUALITY AND STANDARD OF MACHINES USED, THEREFORE THE MARGINAL DECLINE IN THE OVERALL YIELD IS OF NO SIGNIFICANCE. THE AO HAS NOT REJECTED THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT WHICH HAVE BEEN AUDITED AND NO PATENT DEFEC T IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT HAVE BEEN FOUND, THEREFORE DISTURBING THE TRADING RESULTS WITHOUT REJECTION OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNT IS NOT APPROPRIATE. THE AO HAS NEITHER REJECTED THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT NOR COMPARED THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WITH ANY OTHER COMPARABLE CASE, NO BAS IS FOR 8.50% YIELD AND RS.480/- PER QTL. RATE HAVE BEE N GIVEN, THEREFORE THE ADDITION IS WITHOUT APPROPRIAT E ANALYSIS AND APPROPRIATE BASE, HENCE IT IS DELETED AND THE GROUND OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. 15. IN GROUND NO.2, THE REVENUE CONTENDED THAT THE CIT(A) WAS NOT RIGHT IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.2,03,000/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF SUPPRESSED YIELD OF RICE AS THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN PADDY HUSK LOWER THAN 18% AS PER LINE OF THIS BUSIN ESS. THE LD. 8 CIT(A) HAD ADJUDICATED THE GROUND NOS. 2, 3 AND 4 T OGETHER RAISED IN THIS APPEAL. THEREFORE, WE ARE ALSO ADJU DICATING GROUND NOS. 2, 3 & 4 TOGETHER. IN GROUND NO.3, REV ENUE CONTENDED THAT THE DELETION OF ADDITION OF RS.59,01 8/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNDER VALUATION OF CLOSING STOCK OF PADD Y HUSK IS NOT RIGHT. IN GROUND NO.4 THE REVENUE ARGUED THAT DELE TION OF ADDITION OF RS.1,50,300/- ON ACCOUNT OF SUPPRESSED SALE OF HUSK IS NOT JUSTIFIED. THE YIELD OF PADDY HUSK IN THE C ASE OF ASSESSEE WAS LESS THAN 18% WHEREAS THE AO TOOK IT AT 18%. T HE AO APPLIED RATE OF RS.80/- PER QTL. AND MADE ADDITION OF RS.2,03,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF SUPPRESSED PRODUCTION O F PADDY HUSK. SIMILARLY, THE ASSESSEE VALUED THE CLOSING ST OCK OF PADDY HUSK AT RS.54.34 PER QTL. WHEREAS AO APPLIED RATE O F RS.80/- PER QTL. AND CONSEQUENTLY, MADE ADDITION OF RS.59,0 18/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNDER VALUATION OF THE CLOSING STOCK. F URTHER, THE AO FOUND THAT THE PADDY HUSK WAS SOLD AT RS.48/- PE R QTL. AGAINST THE MARKET RATE OF RS.80/- PER QTL. AND CON SEQUENTLY, MADE AN ADDITION OF RS.1,50,300/- ON ACCOUNT OF SUP PRESSED SALE OF PADDY. 16. WE HAVE CAREFULLY PERUSED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS , FACTS OF THE CASE AND THE DETAILED ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A ) WITH REFERENCE TO THE SPECIFIC FACT SITUATION OF THE CAS E. FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN PARA 10 IN RESPECT OF GROUND NOS. 2,3 & 4 ARE REPRODUCED HEREUNDER : 10. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND TH E SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE. THE AO HAS NEITHER REJECTED THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT NOR FOUND ANY DEFECT IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT, WHEREAS ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED THAT COMPLETE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT WERE PRODUCED AND THE 9 AUDITED FINAL RESULTS, TRADING, PROFIT AND LOSS ACC OUNT AND BALANCE SHEET WERE FILED. AO HAS NOT EVEN CORRE CTLY CALCULATED THE PRODUCTION. AS PER THE DETAIL GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE, THE PRODUCTION OF PADDY HUSK IS ABOUT 20. 92% AND THEREFORE, THE AO HAS NOT CORRECTED COMPUTED TH E PRODUCTION OF PADDY HUSK AND IN ANY CASE AO HAS NOT GIVEN THE BASIS OF STANDARD YIELD OF PADDY HUSK AT 18%, THEREFORE THE ADDITION OF RS.2,03,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF SUPPRESSED YIELD OF RICE HUSK IS DELETED. SIMILARLY, FOR CLOSING STOCK OF PADDY HUSK, AO HAS NOT GIVEN THE BASIS OF THE RATE OF RS.80/- PER QTL,. AP PLIED BY THE ASSESSEE. IT HAS NOT EVEN BEEN COMPARED BY ANY OTHER COMPARATIVE CASE. ASSESSEE ITSELF HAS SOLD TH E HUSK AT THE AVERAGE RATE OF 54.34 PER QTL. WHICH HA S NEITHER BEEN VERIFIED NOR CHECKED BY THE AO FROM TH E PURCHASERS. AT THE SAME TIME, CLOSING STOCK IS TO B E VALUED AT COST OR MARKET PRICE WHICHEVER IS LESS AN D NOT AT MARKET PRICE AS HAS BEEN PRESUMED BY THE AO, THEREFORE, THE ADDITION OF RS.59,018/- ON ACCOUNT O F UNDER VALUATION OF CLOSING STOCK OF PADDY HUSK IS DELETED. SIMILARLY THE AO HAS PRESUMED WITHOUT ANY BASIS THA T THE PADDY HUSK HAS BEEN SHOWN TO HAVE BEEN SOLD AT A LOW RATE BECAUSE WITHOUT ANY BASIS HE PRESUMED THE RATE AT RS.80/- PER QTL. THE AO HAS NEITHER EXAMINE D THE PARTIES TO WHOM THE HUSK HAS BEEN SOLD NOR REJECTED THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT, WHEREAS ALL THE DETAILS WERE AVAI LABLE WITH HIM, THEREFORE, THE ADDITION OF RS.1,50,300/- ON ACCOUNT OF SUPPRESSION OF SALE OF PADDY HUSK IS WIT HOUT ANY BASIS, HENCE IT IS DELETED. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE THREE GROUND OF APPEAL OF TH E ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED. 17. IN VIEW OF THE DETAILED FACTUAL FINDINGS OF THE CIT(A), THESE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE REVENUE CANNOT BE S USTAINED. 10 THERE IS NO INFIRMITY IN THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CI T(A), AND, HENCE, THE SAME ARE UPHELD. 18. IN GROUND NO.5, REVENUE CONTENDED THAT CIT(A) E RRED IN DELETING ADDITION OF RS.90,044/- ON ACCOUNT OF INTE REST AS THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT GIVEN ANY REASON AS TO WHY INTERES T BEARING FUNDS WERE ADVANCED TO THESE CONCERNS WITHOUT INTER EST. 19. IN VIEW OF THE FINDINGS GIVEN BY US WHILE ADJUD ICATING THE GROUND NO.2 OF THE ASSESSEE'S APPEAL, THIS GROUND O F APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 20. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO . 236/DEL/2009 IS PARTLY ALLOWED AND THE APPEAL OF TH E REVENUE IN ITA NO. 131/CHD/2009 IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 19 TH DEC.,2011. SD/- SD/- (H.L.KARWA) (MEHAR SINGH) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 19 TH DEC.,2011. POONAM COPY TO: THE APPELLANT, THE RESPONDENT, THE CIT(A), THE CIT ,DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT CHANDIGARH