The DCIT, Circle 9, Ahmedabad V. M/s. B. Nanji & Co., Ahmedabad

ITA 1752/AHD/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1235 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-06-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 13-06-2016
• Assessment Year: 1997-1998
• Appeal Filed On: 13-06-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: JAGDISH
• Keywords: Business expenditure
• Section: 37; 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD B BENCH (BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITA. NO: 1646 & 1752/AHD/2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 1997-98) B. NANJI & CO., C/O B. NANJI CONSTRUCTION P. LTD., MOORTI BUNGLOW, 5, ASHOK NAGAR, BEHIND SUNDERBAN, SATELLITE, AHMEDABAD- 380015 THE DCIT (OSD), CIRCLE-9, AHMEDABAD V/S V/S THE DCIT (OSD), CIRCLE-9, AHMEDABAD B. NANJI & CO., C/O B. NANJI CONSTRUCTION P. LTD., MOORTI BUNGLOW, 5, ASHOK NAGAR, BEHIND SUNDERBAN, SATELLITE, AHMEDABAD- 380015 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN: AAFFB6445F APPELLANT BY : SHRI SAKAR SHARMA, AR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI JAGDISH, CIT/ D.R. ( )/ ORDER DATE OF HEARING : 13 -06-201 6 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 20 -06-2016 ITA NO. 1646 & 1752/AHD/2013 . A.Y. 1997-9 8 2 PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: 1. ITA NOS. 1646 & 1752/AHD/2013 ARE CROSS APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE REVENUE PREFERRED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A)-XV, AHMEDABAD DATED 28.03.2013 PERTAINING TO A.Y. 1997- 98. 2. THE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE READS AS UNDER:- 1. THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN CONF IRMING DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST OF RS. 52,20,883/-. 2. THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN DETERM INING ASSESSABLE INCOME AT RS. 51,44,374/- AGAINST INCOME LIABLE TO BE ASSE SSED AT RS. 10,70,958/- . 3. THE GRIEVANCE OF THE REVENUE READS AS UNDER:- 1. THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-XV, AHMEDABAD HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 36,46,683/- (RS. 6,79,987/-+ RS/ 29,66,696/-) MADE ON ACCOUNT OF QUA NTIFICATION OF DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST RELATED TO BORROWED FUNDS UTILIZED FOR THE PURPOSE OF PURCHASE OF SHARES OF INTERNATIONAL HOUSING FINA NCE CORPORATION LIMITED (IHFCL) AND NOT FOR BUSINESS PURPOSE. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E, THE LD. CIT(A)-XV, AHMEDABAD OUGHT TO HAVE UPHELD THE ORDER OF THE ASS ESSING OFFICER. 3. IT IS THEREFORE PRAYED THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD. CI T(A)-XV, AHMEDABAD MAY BE SET-ASIDE AND THAT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER BE R ESTORED. 4. IN THIS CASE, THE FIRST ASSESSMENT ORDER WAS MADE U /S. 144 OF THE ACT VIDE ORDER DATED 22.03.2000 WHEREIN THE NET LOSS OF RS. 55,75,070/- WAS ASSESSED AT RS. 1,43,72,360/- WHICH INTERALIA I NCLUDED DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST OF RS. 1,14,20,616/-. THE MATTER TRAVELLED UP TO THE TRIBUNAL. THE ISSUES BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL REL ATING TO THE ITA NO. 1646 & 1752/AHD/2013 . A.Y. 1997-9 8 3 DISALLOWANCE WERE (A) DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST ON THE PRETEXT THAT THE BORROWED AMOUNT WAS NOT USED FOR THE PURPOSES OF BU SINESS (B) DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST ON THE PRETEXT THAT THE BO RROWED FUNDS WERE UTILIZED IN PURCHASE OF SHARES. 5. BEFORE PROCEEDING FURTHER, IT WOULD BE PERTINENT TO POINT OUT THAT THE DISALLOWANCES MADE WERE BASED ON THE FINDINGS GIVEN IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1996-97. THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHOR ITY HAS OBSERVED THAT THE FUNDS BORROWED FROM IHFC LTD. IN THE YEAR 1995-96 WERE FOR MAKING TOTAL INVESTMENT IN SHARES. THE FIRST APPELL ATE AUTHORITY IN A.Y. 1996-97 ALLOWED RS. 16,49,090/- AS INTEREST U/S. 36 (1)(III) OF THE ACT WHICH WAS SUBSEQUENTLY UPHELD BY THE TRIBUNAL. 6. IT WAS THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE IN A.Y. 96-97 , THAT IT HAD CURRENT ACCOUNT OF BORROWING WITH IHFCL, THE FUND FROM THIS ACCOUNT WAS UTILIZED FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS. ON THIS CLAIM , THE INTEREST OF RS. 16,49,090/- WAS ALLOWED. IN A.Y. 96-97, THE DISALLO WANCE OF RS. 68,60,252/- WAS UPHELD BY THE TRIBUNAL. 7. IN THE LINE OF THE FINDINGS GIVEN IN A.Y. 96-97 FOR THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR, SIMILAR DISALLOWANCES WERE MADE. T HE DISALLOWANCE COMPONENT COMPRISES OF INTEREST PAYMENT TO IHFCL RS . 1,07,40,629/- AND INTEREST PAYABLE TO BANKS AND OTHERS RS. 6,80,0 00/- TOTALING TO RS. 1,14,20,629/-. 8. IN THE FIRST ROUND OF LITIGATION, THE FIRST APPELLA TE AUTHORITY AND OBSERVED AS UNDER:- ON REFERENCE TO THE FINDINGS OF MY PREDECESSOR FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 1996-97, IT IS NOTED THAT A SUM OF RS. 16,49,090/- WAS HELD AS BUSINESS EXPENSES OUT OF THE SAID INTEREST CLAIM IN ASSESSME NT YEAR 1996-97 OUT OF ITA NO. 1646 & 1752/AHD/2013 . A.Y. 1997-9 8 4 THE INTEREST PAID TO IHFCL LTD. IN THE CURRENT YEAR IN ADDITION TO THE SAID INTEREST, THE APPELLANT HAS ALSO PAID RS. 6,79,987/ - TO JANTA CO. OP. BANK AND GUJARAT LEASE & FINANCING LTD. ACCORDINGLY, CON SIDERING THE ABOVE FACTS, I CONSIDER IT FAIR AND APPROPRIATE TO CONSID ER TOTAL INTEREST OF RS. 23,29,077/- (16,19,090/- +6,79,987/-) IS ALLOWABLE U/S 36(1)(III) FOR THIS YEAR. SIMILARLY, I AGREE TO HOLD THAT THE CLAIM OF THE APPELLANT FOR BUSINESS EXPENSES IS NOT TENABLE AS HELD BY MY PREDECESSOR I N ASSESSMENT YEAR 1996-97. HOWEVER, IN THE SAID YEAR INTEREST WAS CON SIDERED ALLOWABLE U/S. 57(III) AMOUNTING TO RS. 38,42,978/-. KEEPING IN VI EW THAT SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITIES WERE GRANTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO WORK OUT THE DETAILS OF ADMISSIBLE CLAIM U/S. 36 AND U/S. 57, I CONSIDER IT FAIR AND APPROPRIATE TO ALLOW SUM OF RS. 38,42,978/- AS INTEREST ADMISSIBLE U/S. 57(III) FOR THIS YEAR KEEPING IN VIEW THE FACT THAT THERE HAS BEEN NO CHA NGE IN THE INVESTMENTS WITH IHFC LTD. DURING THE YEAR AND OTHER FACTORS RE MAINING THE SAME. THUS, THE TOTAL ADMISSIBLE INTEREST U/S. 36(1)(III) AND 57(III) WORKS OUT TO RS. 61,72,055/- (23,29,077/-+ 38,42,978/-) AND FOR THE BALANCE INTEREST OF RS. 52,48,500/- OUT OF RS. 1,14,20,616/-. 9. THIS FINDING OF THE LD. CIT(A) WAS CHALLENGED BEFOR E THE TRIBUNAL AND THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 1257 & 1330/AHD/2001 HELD A S UNDER:- 36. APROPOS ITA NO.L257/AHD/2001 FOR ASST. YEAR 19 97-98 (ASSESSEE'S APPEAL) AND ITA NO.L330/AHD/2001 FOR ASST. YEAR 199 7-98 (REVENUE'S APPEAL): FOR ASST. YEAR 1996-97, SIMILAR ISSUES HAV E BEEN DECIDED IN THE ABOVE PART OF THIS ORDER. THE SAID ORDER WILL BE AP PLICABLE TO THE PRESENT CASES ALSO AS THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES ARE SIMIL AR. IN THE SAID ORDER IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT INTEREST RELATING TO BORROWINGS MADE FOR ASSESSEE'S REGULAR BUSINESS I.E. THE BUSINESS OF PURCHASE AND SALE OF LAND IS ALLOWABLE UNDER SECTION 36(L)(III). IT IS FURTHER H ELD THAT INTEREST PAID ON BORROWED FUNDS TO THE EXTENT THEY WERE UTILIZED FOR THE PURPOSE OF PURCHASE OF SHARES OF IHFCL CANNOT BE ALLOWED EITHE R UNDER SECTION ITA NO. 1646 & 1752/AHD/2013 . A.Y. 1997-9 8 5 36(L)(III) OR UNDER SECTION 57(III) OF THE ACT, THE REFORE, DISALLOWANCE TO THAT EXTENT WAS RIGHTLY MADE BY ASSESSING OFFICER. 37. IT WAS POINTED OUT BY THE LD. A.R. THAT THERE A RE CERTAIN CALCULATION MISTAKES WHICH ARE REQUIRED TO BE CORRECTED. THEREF ORE, FOR ASST. YEAR 1997-98, THE MATTER IS RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF ASSESSING OFFICER WITH A LIMITED PURPOSE TO QUANTIFY THE INTEREST WHICH IS R ELATED TO BORROWED FUNDS UTILIZED FOR THE PURPOSE OF PURCHASE OF SHARES OF I HFCL. AFTER QUANTIFICATION, SUCH INTEREST WILL BE DISALLOWED BY ASSESSING OFFICER IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DIRECTION GIVEN IN THIS ORDER. WE DIRECT ACCORDINGLY. 10. IN THE LIGHT OF THE AFOREMENTIONED FACTS, ALL THAT WE HAVE TO SEE WHETHER THE DIRECTIONS OF THE TRIBUNAL HAVE BEEN CO MPLIED IN LETTER AND SPIRIT. WE FIND THAT IN THE SET ASIDE ASSESSMENT PR OCEEDINGS, THE A.O. HAS DISALLOWED THE ENTIRE CLAIM OF INTEREST AT RS. 1,14,20,660/-. 11. THE MAIN REASON FOR THE DISALLOWANCE IS THAT THE AS SESSEE FAILED TO PRODUCE OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND DETAILS TO SUBS TANTIATE ITS CLAIM OF QUANTIFICATION OF INTEREST. 12. THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY D URING THE APPEAL FOR THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER ARE WORTH MENTIONING AND READ AS UNDER:- (8)(A) I HAVE PERUSED THE FACTS, SUBMISSION AND CON TENTIONS OF BOTH A.O. AS WELL AS APPELLANT IN VARIOUS ORDERS AS AVAILABLE AND DISCUSSED IN BRIEF IN EARLIER PARAS. THE IMPORTANT OBSERVATIONS/FINDINGS BY HON'BLE ITAT AFTER THE SECOND ROUND HAD ALREADY BEEN DISCUSSED AT PARA 5 WHERE REPEATEDLY HON'BLE ITAT EMPHASIZED THAT APPELLANT FAILED TO PR ODUCE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND DETAILS BEFORE ANY OF THE AUTHORITIES HENCE THE BASIS OF BIFURCATION NOW FURNISHED ABOUT INTEREST PAYMENT TO M/S. LHFCL HAS TO BE AUTHENTICATED BEFORE ADJUDICATING THE ALREADY DECID ED RATIO BY HON'BLE ITA NO. 1646 & 1752/AHD/2013 . A.Y. 1997-9 8 6 ITAT THAT INTEREST PAID AND CLAIMED ON BORROWED FUN DS FOR INVESTMENT IN SHARE IS NEITHER ALLOWABLE U/S.36(1)(III) OF THE AC T NOR U/S.57(III) OF THE ACT. IN TWO COMPLETE ROUNDS, NONE OF THE AUTHORITIES DIS CUSSED THE FACTS RELATED TO THIS ISSUE IN THE ABSENCE OF BOOKS AND DETAILS A ND THEREFORE THE RATIO DECIDED BY HON'BLE ITAT IN THE CASE OF APPELLANT IN A.Y. 1996-97 HAS TO BE APPLIED AFTER RESOLVING THIS ISSUE FOR DISALLOWA NCE OF INTEREST. 13. A PERUSAL OF THE ORDER OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHO RITY SHOWS THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO SUBMIT THE INFORMATION AND D ETAILS INCOMPLIANCE OF VARIOUS NOTICES OF A.O. ON ACCOUNT OF NOT IN POS SESSION OF SUCH DETAIL. IT WAS STATED THAT THE CORPORATE OFFICE WAS GUTTED IN FIRE IN 1999. 14. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, BEFORE US, WE ASKED THE LD. COUNSEL WHY THIS FACT WAS NOT EMPHASIZED DURING THE EARLIER ROU ND OF LITIGATION. THE LD. COUNSEL WAS ALSO ASKED WHY IT WAS NOT BROUGHT T O THE NOTICE OF THE TRIBUNAL THAT THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES W ERE GUTTED IN FIRE. 15. WE FURTHER FIND THAT THERE IS NO CHANGE IN THE FACT AND FIGURE RELATING TO INVESTMENT IN SHARES AS WELL AS LOAN UT ILIZED FOR THE PURCHASE OF THE SHARE. ALL THAT WE HAVE TO DETERMIN E IS WHETHER THE DIRECTIONS OF THE TRIBUNAL HAS BEEN FOLLOWED IN DET ERMINING THE DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST OUT OF THE INTEREST PAID A ND CLAIMED AT RS. 1,07,40,829/- TO M/S. IHFCL. AS MENTIONED ELSEWHERE , THERE IS NO MATERIAL DIFFERENCE OF FACTS WITH THAT OF THE FACTS OF PREVIOUS YEAR TO A.Y. 1996-97. EXCEPT THAT, IN THAT YEAR BOOKS OF AC COUNTS WERE PRODUCED AND EXAMINED WHEREAS THE SAME WERE NOT MAD E AVAILABLE FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY ARE AS UNDER:- ITA NO. 1646 & 1752/AHD/2013 . A.Y. 1997-9 8 7 (II) AS DISCUSSED IN INITIAL PARAS OF THIS ORDER TH AT IN A.Y. 96-97. OUT OF THE TOTAL INTEREST PAID BY APPELLANT TO M/S IHFCL OF RS . 85,07,342/-, THE A.O TOTALLY DISALLOWED THE SAME. THE LD. CIT(A) COMPUTE D 6% EXTRA INTEREST ON ACCOUNT OF 22% INTEREST PAID ON BORROWED FUND OF RS . 2,51,21,000/- UTILIZED FOR PURCHASE OF SHARE WITH 22% INTEREST ON REFUND OF SHARE APPLICATION MONEY OF RS. 38,75,000/- I.E. RS. 5,31, 014/- AND 22% INTEREST ON LOAN OF RS. 44,50,000/- FROM M/S SANKIRA RESORT PVT. LTD. I.E. RS. 9,79,000/- AND IN TOTAL RS. 30,17,2747- (15072260 + 531014 + 979000) WAS DISALLOWED AS NOT ALLOWABLE U/S 36(1)(III) AS W ELL AS U/S 37 OF THE ACT. OUT OF THE BALANCE, RS. 16,49,090/- WAS ALLOWED U/S 36(1)(III) BEING RELATED TO BUSINESS AND RS. 38,42,978/- U/S 57(III). HON'BL E ITAT AT PARA 18 CLEARLY CONSIDERED THAT AS FAR AS DISALLOWANCES OF RS. 30,1 7,274/- IS CONCERNED THE APPELLANT IS NOT IN APPEAL WHILE FOR ALLOWED IN TEREST OF RS. 54,92,068/- (1649090 + 3842978) THE DEPARTMENT WAS IN APPEAL. T HE HON'BLE ITAT HELD THAT AS FAR AS RS. 16,49,090/- IS CONCERNED TH E SAME IS RELATED TO BUSINESS AND ALLOWABLE U/S 36(1)(III) OF THE ACT WH ILE THE AMOUNT OF RS. 38,42,978/- IS NOT ALLOWABLE U/S. 57(III) OF THE AC T, HENCE IT REVERSED THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) TO THAT EXTENT I.E. TOTAL DISAL LOWANCE OUT OF RS. 85,07,342/- ARE OF RS. 68,60,252/- (3017274 + 38429 78). IT IS THEREFORE AS PER THE HONBLE ITAT OUT OF THE TOTAL INTEREST PAYM ENT TO M/S. IHFCL ONLY RS. 16,49,090/- WAS ALLOWED U/S. 36(1)(III) AND BAL ANCE AMOUNT OF RS. 68,60,252/- WAS DISALLOWED AS NEITHER ALLOWABLE U/S . 36(1)(III), 37 AND 57(III) OF THE ACT. 16. THE LD. CIT(A) FURTHER OBSERVED AS UNDER:- 9. ON THE BASIS OF ABOVE DISCUSSION, THE ALLOWABLE INT EREST U/S.36(1 )(III) OF THE ACT AT THE RATE OF 22% WILL BE ON THE OPENING B ALANCE OF RS.1,34,83,980/- AS ON 01.04.1996. THIS COMES TO RS .29,66,696/-. NOW THE BALANCE INTEREST OF RS.77,73,933/- OUT OF TOTAL INTEREST PAID TO IHFCL DURING PREVIOUS YEAR 96-97 (A.Y. 97-98) OF RS. 1,07 ,40,629/- IS THE INTEREST ITA NO. 1646 & 1752/AHD/2013 . A.Y. 1997-9 8 8 WHICH IS ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE FUNDS BORROWED BY APPE LLANT FROM HFCL FOR THE UTILIZATION OF INVESTMENT IN SHARES OF IHFCL. IT IS THEREFORE IN COMPLIANCE OF HON'BLE ITAT DIREC TION VIDE ORDER DT. 26/08/11 VIDE PARA 6.1, THE QUANTIFICATION OF DISAL LOWANCE OF INTEREST IN TERMS OF DIRECTIONS OF THE ITAT IN PARA 37 OF THEIR ORDER DT. 15/12/06 COMES TO RS. 77,73,933/-. THE GROUND NO. 1 OF REVENUE APP EAL AND GROUND NO. 2 OF ASSESSEE APPEAL AS SET-ASIDE IS THEREFORE ADJUDI CATED ACCORDINGLY. 10.(I)LN CONCLUSION, OUT OF THE TOTAL INTEREST CLAI M OF APPELLANT OF RS. 1,14,20,6297, THE INTEREST OF RS.6,80,000/-(1,14,20 ,629- 1,07,40,629) HAD ALREADY BEEN ALLOWED BY LD. CIT(A) AND DULY CONFIRM ED BY HON'BLE ITAT. IT IS ONLY OUT OF RS. 1,07,40,629/-, AN AMOUNT OF RS. 77,73,933/- IS DISALLOWED BEING INTEREST PAID & CLAIMED RELATED TO INTEREST ON FUNDS BORROWED FOR THE PURPOSE OF PURCHASE OF SHARES OF I HFCL, WHILE RS. 29,66,696/- IS ALLOWED U/S36(1)(III)OF THE ACT. (II) SINCE A.O. DISALLOWED THE ENTIRE INTEREST OF R S. 1,14,20,629/-INCLUDING RS. 1,07,40,629/- AND AFTER TWO ROUNDS OF APPEAL WA S SET ASIDE TO A.O.'S FILE WHERE AGAIN SUCH AMOUNT WAS DISALLOWED, THE DI SALLOWANCE OF RS. 77,73,933/- WILL RESULT INTO PART RELIEF TO APPELLA NT. THE A.O. IS DIRECTED TO TAKE THESE FIGURES IN COMPUTATION OF TOTAL INCOME W ITH OTHER ISSUES ALREADY UPHELD OR DELETED IN APPEAL EFFECT RELATED TO THIS SET ASIDE ISSUE ONLY. (III) AS PER APPELLANT REQUEST AS FOLLOWS: (A) INTEREST CLAIMED TO BE FOR PURCHASE OF SHARE RS. 63,96,028/- LESS: ALREADY DISALLOWED AND UPHELD. RS. 25,53,050/- BALANCE TO BE DISALLOWED RS. 38,42,978/- (B) INTEREST CLAIMED TO BE FOR BUSINESS PURPOSE RS. 43,44,601/- LESS: ALREADY ALLOWED RS. 16,49,090/- BALANCE TO BE ALLOWED RS. 29,95.511/- THEREFORE RESULTANT RS. 11,47,467/- (3842978 - 2695 511) IS TO BE FURTHER DISALLOWED IS TO BE MODIFIED AS FOLLOWS. ITA NO. 1646 & 1752/AHD/2013 . A.Y. 1997-9 8 9 (A) INTEREST CLAIMED TO BE FOR PURCHASE OF SHARES RS. 63,96,028/- LESS: ALREADY DISALLOWED AND UPHELD RS. 25,53,0 50/- BALANCE TO BE DISALLOWED RS. 38,42,978/- (B)INTEREST CLAIMED TO BE FOR BUSINESS PURPOSE R S. 43,44,601/- LESS: (I) ALREADY ALLOWED RS. 16,49,090/- (II) FURTHER TO BE ALLOWED RS. 13,17,606/- TOTAL TO BE ALLOWED RS. 29,66,696/- BALANCE TO BE DISALLOWED RS. 13,77,905/- THEREFORE TOTAL FURTHER TO BE DISALLOWED IS RS. 52, 20,883/- (3842978 + 1377905). IT IS THEREFORE AS PER THE WORKING GIVEN BY APPELLANT VIDE LETTER DT. 24/11/12 TO THE A.O. WHERE THE ASSESSABLE INCOM E WAS COMPUTED AT RS.10,70,958/- AFTER APPELLANT'S PRAYER OF FURTHER ADDITION OF RS.11,47,467/- BUT NOW THIS WILL CHANGED TO RS. 51,44,374/--. THE A.O. IS DIRECTED TO VERIFY THE FACTS OF SUCH EFFECT AT THE TIME OF GIVEN APPEA L EFFECT TO ABOVE ORDER. 17. AGGRIEVED BY THIS FINDING OF THE LD. CIT(A), THE AS SESSEE IS IN APPEAL AGAINST THE CONFIRMATION OF THE DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST OF RS. 52,20,883/- AND THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL AGAINST TH E DELETION OF THE ADDITION OF RS. 6,79,987/- AND RS. 29,66,696/-. BEF ORE US, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ONCE AGAIN SUBMITTED THE W ORKING OF ALLOCATION OF INTEREST BETWEEN TWO LOAN WHICH IS AS UNDER:- BEFORE THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AHMEDABAD AHMEDABAD BENCH-B, AHMEDABAD ITA NO. 1646 & 1752/AHD/2013 WORKING FOR ALLOCATION OF INTEREST BETWEEN TWO LOAN A/C PARTICULARS IHFC DEMAND LOAN A/C IHFC BUILDER LOAN ACCOUNT (USED FOR MAKING TOTAL ITA NO. 1646 & 1752/AHD/2013 . A.Y. 1997-9 8 10 (USED FOR BUSINESS PURPOSES) INVESTMENT IN SHARES) A OPENING BALANCE AS ON 01.04.1996 13484980 3619488 4 49589864 B RATE AT WHICH INTEREST WAS PAID 22% 22% C AMOUNT OF INTEREST @ 22% ON OPENING BALANCE 2966696 7943074 10909770 D BALANCE OF OPENING BALANCE WITH INTEREST ACCRUED THEREON (A+C) 16451676 44047958 60499634 E CLOSING BALANCE AS ON 31.03.1997 24600046 3621565 5 60815701 F LESS: OPENING BALANCE PLUS INTEREST ACCRUED THEREON AS PER D ABOVE 16451676 44047958 60499634 G CONSIDERING INTEREST COMPONENT INCLUDED THEREIN 8148370 (7832303) 316067 H GROSS INTEREST COMPONENT ON THE INCREAMENTAL AMOUNT 1469378 (1412383) 56995 I NET INCREASE/(DECREASE) ON ACCOUNT OF FRESH BORROWING/REPAYMENT 6678992 (6419920) 259072 J TOTAL INTEREST ON LOAN ACCOUNTS (C+H) 4436074 653 0691 10966765 K CLOSING BALANCE TOGETHER WITH INTEREST (A+I+J) 24600046 36215655 60815701 INTERES T ALLOCATION CLAIMED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER 4344601 6396028 10740629 18. HOWEVER, AS MENTIONED ELSEWHERE, THE AFORE-STATED W ORKING IS NOT SUPPORTED BY ANY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES, IT IS S IMPLY ARITHMETICAL CALCULATION WITHOUT ANY SUPPORT. AGAIN, AS MENTIONE D ELSEWHERE, IT IS THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT NECESSARY DETAI LS HAVE BEEN GUTTED IN FIRE AND, THEREFORE, COULD NOT BE MADE AVAILABLE . 19. WE HAVE ALREADY MENTIONED THAT THE ISSUE BEFORE US IS TO SEE WHETHER THE DIRECTIONS OF THE TRIBUNAL HAVE BEEN FO LLOWED IN LETTER AND SPIRIT. AFTER CONSIDERING THE ENTIRE FACTUAL MATRIX , IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, NOTHING NEW HAS COME BEFORE US NOR BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES FROM THE SIDE OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH COU LD JUSTIFY THE ITA NO. 1646 & 1752/AHD/2013 . A.Y. 1997-9 8 11 QUANTIFICATION OF INTEREST AS PER THE ARITHMETICAL CALCULATION OF THE ASSESSEE MENTIONED HEREINABOVE. 20. CONSIDERING THE ENTIRE FACTS IN TOTALITY, IN OUR C ONSIDERED OPINION, THE FINDINGS OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHOR ITY AS MENTIONED HEREINABOVE ARE LOGICAL AND SCIENTIFIC AND, THEREFO RE, DO NOT CALL FOR ANY INTERFERENCE. 21. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS BY THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 20 - 06 - 2016 . SD/- SD/- (RAJPAL YADAV) (N. K. BILLAIYA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD: TRUE COPY RAJESH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT (APPEALS) 4. THE CIT CONCERNED. 5. THE DR., ITAT, AHMEDABAD. 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER DEPUTY/ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT,AHME DABAD