Shri Ashish Krishnakant Shah, Gandhinagar V. The Income tax Officer,Ward-1, Gandhinagar

ITA 195/AHD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 94444 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 7 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-09-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 15-09-2015
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 23-01-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANIL KUMAR

Judgement Text

ITA NO . 19 5 /AHD/ 20 1 2 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2 0 0 6 - 07 PAGE 1 OF 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH , SMC , AHMEDABAD [CORAM: PRAMOD KUMAR AM ] ITA NO. 195 / AHD / 2 0 1 2 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 0 6 - 07 ASHISH KRISHNAKANT SHAH, ....... .. . ..... APPELLANT BAZAR, SARDAV, GANDHINAGAR. [PAN AFDPS 6935 G ] VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, .... .................. .... .. RESPONDENT WARD 1 , GANDHINAGAR. APPEARANCES BY: NONE FOR THE APPELLANT A NIL KUMAR FOR THE RESPONDENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : SEPTEMBER 1 5 TH , 201 5 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : SEPTEMBER 2 1 ST , 2015 O R D E R 1. BY WAY OF TH IS APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE APPELLANT HAS C ALLED INTO QUESTION CORRECTNESS OF THE LD. CIT(A) S ORDER DATED 22 ND NOVEMBER, 2011 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006 - 07, ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS : - 1. A) THE L EARNED CIT ( A ) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACT WHILE CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS.3,66, 769/ - M ADE BY THE LEARNED AO WHILE CONSIDERING THE INTEREST EXPENSES NOT ALLOWABLE AS NO TDS HAS BEEN DEDUCTED WHETHER INTEREST HAS BEEN CLAIMED UNDER THE HEAD OF INCOME FROM BUSINESS OR PROFES S ION OR UNDER HEAD AS INCOME F ROM OTHER SOURCES WHILE NOT CONSIDERING THE FACTS OF THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT. 1. B) THE LEARNED CIT(A)HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS WHILE NOT CONSIDERING THAT THE APPELLANT IS HAVING SUFFICIENT INTEREST FREE FUNDS IN THE FORM OF CAPITAL ACCOUNT INTEREST FREE UNSECURED LOANS. 2. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HA S ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS WHILE NOT ADJUDICATING THE INITIATION OF PENALTY PROCEEDING BY THE LEARNED A.O. U/S 271(1)(C). ITA NO . 19 5 /AHD/ 20 1 2 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2 0 0 6 - 07 PAGE 2 OF 2 2. WHEN THIS APPEAL WAS CALLED OUT FOR HEARING , IT WAS N OTICED THAT THE ISSUE IS COVERED , IN PRINCIPLE , IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY HON BLE DELHI HIGH COURT S JUDGEMENT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. ANSAL LAND MARK TOWNSHIP (P) LTD. , JUDGEMENT DAT E D 2 6 TH AUGUST, 2015 , IN ITA NO.160/2015 , WHEREIN THEIR LORDSHIPS HA VE HELD THAT AS LONG AS THE RECIPIENT OF THE INCOME HAS PAID THE DUE TAX IN RESPECT OF THE INCOME EMBEDDED IN THE PAYMENTS, D ISALLOWANCE UNDER SECTION 40 (A)(IA) OF THE ACT CANNOT BE INVOKED. HOWEVER, AS THIS ASPECT OF THE MATTER HAS NOT BEEN EXAMINED BY ANY OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW, WITH THE CONSENT OF LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE THE MATTER IS REMITTED TO THE FILE OF THE A SSESSING OFFICER F OR ADJUDICATION DENOVO IN THE LIGHT OF ABOVE OBSERVATIONS AND IN THE LIGHT OF LAW LAID DOWN BY THE HON BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. ANSAL LAND MARK TOWNSHIP (P) LTD. (SUPRA) . 3. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 21 S T DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2015. SD/ - PRAMOD KUM AR (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AHMEDABAD, THE 21 ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER , 2015 PBN/* COPIES TO: (1) THE APPELLANT (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) COMMISSIONER (4) CIT(A) (5) DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUA RD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCHES, AHMEDABAD