Fahim Rai , Secunderabad V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-10(5), Hyderabad

ITA 1810/Hyd/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6685 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-12-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB-A
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 15-12-2019
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: T. SUNIL GOUTAM
• Section: 69C; 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad (Through Video Conferencing) Before Shri A. Mohan Alankamony, Accountant Member AND Shri S.S. Godara, Judicial Member ITA No.1810/Hyd/2019 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Fahim Rai, Secunderabad. PAN : AEJPR9407B Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-10(5), Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Sri B. Shanti Kumar Revenue by : Sri T. Sunil Goutam Date of hearing: 29/11/2021 Date of pronouncement: 09/12/2021 O R D E R Per S. S. Godara, J.M. This assessee’s appeal for A.Y 2015-16 arises from the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – 6, Hyderabad’s order dated 09.10.2019 involving proceedings under section 143(3) of Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, “the Act”). Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 2. Coming to the first issue of interest disallowance amounting to Rs.3,87,013/- made u/s 69C of the Act in both the lower appellate proceedings, we note from a perusal of CIT(A)’s ITA No.1810/Hyd/2019 2 discussion in Para 7.1 to 7.12 that the same had rather been paid from his wife’s bank account only without any nexus qua loans and advances in question. We note in these facts that the learned lower authorities have rightly disallowed the impugned instant in these peculiar facts and circumstances. 3. Next comes the second issue of interest payment disallowance amounting to Rs.32,55,646/- made in the course of assessment and affirmed in the CIT(A)’s order as under : ITA No.1810/Hyd/2019 3 ITA No.1810/Hyd/2019 4 (LEFT SPACE INTENTIONALLY) ITA No.1810/Hyd/2019 5 ITA No.1810/Hyd/2019 6 ITA No.1810/Hyd/2019 7 ITA No.1810/Hyd/2019 8 ITA No.1810/Hyd/2019 9 ITA No.1810/Hyd/2019 10 4. It is clear form a perusal of the above extract of lower appellate discussion that the impugned interest amount pertains to housing loan, vehicle loan and personal loan only without having any nexus with the assessee’s business / professional activity. Learned counsel vehemently contended before us that the assessee has intended to carry out his professional activity from residential property only. We find no merit in the assessee’s foregoing arguments as both the lower authorities detailed discussion made it clear that the loan account in question had no nexus with the assessee’s business / professional activity u/s 57 of the Act. The impugned disallowance stands confirmed accordingly. 5. Lastly comes credit card addition of Rs.1,30,000/- u/s 69C of the Act. The CIT(A)’s detailed discussion confirms the same as under : ITA No.1810/Hyd/2019 11 ITA No.1810/Hyd/2019 12 6. Learned authorised representative fails to rebut the clinching fact that the assessee had not been able to prove the corresponding cash payment by explaining the source thereof as evident in the lower appellate discussion. We thus find no reason to interfere with the learned CTI(A)’s action affirming the impugned addition. ITA No.1810/Hyd/2019 13 No other ground has been pressed before us. 7. This assessee’s appeal is dismissed in above terms. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 9 th December, 2021. Sd/- Sd/- (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (S.S. GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Hyderabad, dated 9 th December, 2021. TYNM/sps Copy to: S.No Addresses 1 Fahim Rai, Prop. Rai Medical Hall, 9-4-76, St. Mary Road, Secunderabad. 2 The ITO, Ward-10(5), Income Tax Towers, A.C.Guards, Hyderabad. 3 The CIT(A)-6, Hyderabad 5 The Pr. CIT-6, Hyderabad 6 DR, ITAT Hyderabad Benches 7 Guard File By Order