Surya Processed Food Pvt. Ltd., Noida V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 2231/DEL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 90937 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-04-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 07-04-2015
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 16-04-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIKRAM SAHAY
• Assessee Lawyers: K P GARG
• Keywords: Business income

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: F NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. G.C. GUPTA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. ITA NO. 2231 /DEL / 2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009 - 10 SURYA PROCESSED FOOD VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PVT. LTD., D - 1, SECTOR - 2, WARD - 9(4), NOIDA NEW DELHI (PAN: AAKCS7174G ) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SH. K.P. GARG, CA RESPONDEN T BY: SH. VIKRAM SAHAY, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING: 07.04.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 17.04.2015 ORDER PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM : THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE APPELLANT AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 30.01.2013 PASSED BY LEARNED CIT(A) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 10 RAISING THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: I. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCE OF THE CASE THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APEALS - 12, NEW DELHI HAS ERRE D IN CONFIRMING THE ORDER PASSED BY ASSESSING OFFICER, WARD 9(4), NEW DELHI FOR MAKING THE FAKE ADDITION OF RS. 302197/ - ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST INCOME EARNED BY THE APPELLANT COMPANY ON FIXED DEPOSIT MADE FOR ISSUE THE SEVERAL LETTER OF CREDITS/BANK GUARAN TY. 2 II. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APPEALS - 12, NEW DELHI AND LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER, WARD 9(4), NEW DELHI HAS NEVER ASKED FOR TH E DETAILS OF FIXED DEPOSIT MADE AND THE PURPOSE OF THE SAME. HOWEVER, ALL THE NECESSARY DETAILS HAVE ALREADY BEEN FILED. III. THAT ON FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCE OF THE CASE THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APPEALS - 12, NEW DELHI AND LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER, WARD 9(4), NEW DELHI HAS PASSED THIS ORDER IN HURRY A ND WITHOUT GIVING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE APPELLANT. AND NOT CONSIDERED THE JUSTIFICATION GIVEN BY THE APPELLANT. IV. THAT THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APPEALS - 12, NEW DELHI AND ASSESSING OFFICER, WARD 9(4), NEW DELHI, BEING NOT S USTAINABLE THE APPEAL BE ALLOWED. V. THAT THE APPELLANT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO ADD, DELETE OR MODIFY ANY GROUND OF APPEAL. 2. THE FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE LEADING TO THE PRESENT APPEAL IS AS UNDER: 2.1 THE APPELLANT IS A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE PR OVISIONS OF COMPANIES ACT, 1956 . IT IS ENGAGED IN THE MANUFACTURING AND SELLING OF CHOCOLATES AND WAFERS ETC. FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 10, THE APPELLANT COMPANY FILED RETURN OF INCOME ON 24 TH SEPTEMBER, 2009 OFFER ING NIL INCOME AFTER CLAIMING DEDUCTION UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 80IC OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT, 1956 (FOR SHORT THE ACT ) . THE ASSESSING OFFICER DISALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE APPELLANT BY HOLDING THAT THE APPELLANT COMPANY HAD NOT FILED ANY EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF THE CONTENTION THAT THE FIXED DEPOSITS WERE MADE ONLY TO PROCURE LETTERS OF CREDIT FOR BUSINESS PURPOSES. AGGRIEVED, AN APPEAL WAS FILED BY THE APPELLANT BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A), WHO VIDE ORDER DATED 30.01.2013 DISMISSED THE SAME. HENCE, THE P RESENT APPEAL. 3 4. IT WAS ARGUED BEFORE US THAT WHEN THE FIXED DEPOSITS WERE MADE FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROCURING LETTERS OF CREDIT THE INTEREST INCOME EARNED ON SUCH DEPOSIT IS NOTHING BUT BUSINESS INCOME AND THEREFORE ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80IC OF THE ACT. IN SUPPORT OF THIS PROPOSI TION, RELIANCE WAS PLACED ON THE DECISION OF HON BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE S OF LIBERTY INDIA VS. CIT (SC) - 02/09/2009 , AND CIT VS. KARNAL CO - OPERATIVE SUGAR MILLS LTD. (2000) 243 ITR 2 (SC) . RELIANCE WAS ALSO PLACED ON THE DECISION OF HON BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT - DELHI (IV) VS. JAYPEE DSC VENTURES LTD. 5. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LEANED DEPARTMENT AL REPRESENTATIVE VEHEMENTLY ARGUED THAT THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE ON RECORD TO SHOW THAT THE FIXED DE POSITS ON WHICH INTEREST WAS EARNED WERE MADE ONLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROCURING LETTERS OF CREDIT FOR BUSINESS PURPOSE AND THEREFORE, CLAIM CANNOT BE ALLOWED. 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS OF THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD AS WE LL AS THE PAPER BOOK. WE FIND FROM THE PAPER BOOK THAT ONLY AN APPLICATION TO THE BANKER FOR OPENING OF LETTER OF CREDIT WAS FILED. COPIES OF BALANCE - SHEET, PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT AND THE LEDGER EXTRACT OF INTEREST ACCOUNT WERE FILED. ACCORDING TO US, THE SE MATERIALS DO NOT PROVE CONCLUSIVELY THAT THE FIXED DEPOSITS ON WHICH INTEREST INCOME EARNED WERE MADE ONLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF OPENING OF LETTERS OF CREDIT. THE APPELLANT HAS CHOSEN NOT TO FILE ANY CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE EVEN BEFORE US. MERE RELIANCE ON LEG AL PROPOSITION WITHOUT PROVING THE FACTS CONCLUSIVE LY DOES NOT HELP THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT . IT S 4 NOTHING BUT BALD CLAIM WHICH CANNOT BE ALLOWED. WE, THEREFORE, DISMISS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE APPELLANT . 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE APPELLANT I S DISMISSED. THE DECISION IS PRONOU NCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1 7 T H APRIL , 2015. S D / - S D / - ( G.C. GUPTA ) ( INTURI RAMA RAO) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 1 7 T H APRIL , 2015. RK/ - COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR ASST. REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI