Shri Nitish Prafulchandra Agarwal, Ahmedabad V. ITO, Ward-3(3)(3), Ahmedabad

ITA 2610/AHD/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8967 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-06-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 27-11-2017
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD SMC BENCH BEFORE: SHR I RAJPAL YADAV , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI NITISH PRAFULCHANDRA AGARWAL, 3, KANAKDHARA BUNGLOWS, OPP. KALHAR BUNGLOWS, NANDOLI, SHILAJ, AHMEDABAD - 380058 PAN: AGWPA6842Q (APPELLANT) VS THE IT O , WARD - 3(3)(3) , AHMEDABAD (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : S H RI KEYUR PATEL , SR. D . R. ASSESSEE BY: SHRI S.N. DIVATIA, A.R. DATE OF HEARING : 14 - 06 - 2 019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 27 - 06 - 2 019 / ORDER P ER : AMARJIT SINGH, AC COUNTANT MEMBER : - THIS ASSESSEE S APPEAL FOR A.Y. 2014 - 15 , ARI SES FROM ORDER OF THE CIT(A) - 3, AHMEDABAD DATED 15 - 09 - 2 017 , IN PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961; IN SHORT THE ACT . 2. THE SOLITARY GROUND OF APPEAL OF THE ASSES SEE IS FILED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 6 , 24 , 008/ - MADE BY THE I T A NO . 2610 / A HD/20 17 A SS ESSMENT YEAR 2014 - 15 I.T.A NO. 2610 /AHD/20 17 A.Y. 2014 - 15 PAGE NO SHRI NITISH PRAFULCHANDRA AGARWAL VS. IT O 2 ASSESSING OFFICER AS PER ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED U/S. 143(3) OF THE ACT ON 18 TH DECEMBER, 2016. 3. THE FACT IN BRIEF IS THAT ASSESSEE HAS FILED RET URN OF INCOME DECLARING INCOME OF RS. 17 , 72 , 060/ - ON 28 TH SEP, 2014. THE CASE WAS SUBJECT TO SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT . DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ON VERIFICATION OF THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE , THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTICED THAT ASSESSE HA S SHOWN INTEREST RECEIPT OF RS. 11,8 8 , 870/ - AND INTEREST PAYMENT OF RS. 18 , 21 , 878/ - . THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT EXPLAINED THAT DIFFERENCE IN PAYMENT OF INTEREST, T HEREFORE, THE EXCESS INTEREST PAYMENT OF INTEREST OF RS. 6 , 24 , 008/ - WAS DISALLOWED AND ADDED TO TH E TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. AGGRIEVED ASSESSEE HAS FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. THE RELEVANT PART OF THE FINDING OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER: - 4. DECISION: I HAVE CONS IDERED THE FACTS MENTIONED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND THE SUBMISSION OF THE APPELLANT CAREFULLY. THE APPELLANT SUBMITTED THAT ACTUAL INTEREST PAYMENT IS AT RS.10,24,204/ - AND THE IN TEREST RECEIVABLE IS AT RS. 4,00 ,196/ - . IT IS FOUND THAT THERE IS ENTRY OF RS.7,88,674.12 BOTH ON CREDIT AND DEBIT SIDE OF P & L ACCOUNT. HENCE THE CONTENTION OF INTEREST OUT GO IN AGGREGATE AT RS.10,24,204/ - IS FOUND TO BE CORRECT. FURTHER, IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE DIFFERENTIAL INTEREST OF RS.6,24,008/ - SHOULD BE ALLOWED AS THE APPELLANT IS HAVING SHARE INCOME AND REMUNERATION FROM M/S. SICILIAN VENTURES. THE FUND FLOW ANALYSIS HAS NOT BEEN SUBMITTED SO AS TO PROVE THAT CERTAIN BORROWED FUNDS BY THE APPELLANT HAVE BEEN UTILIZED FOR INVESTMENT IN PARTNERSHIP FIRM FROM WHERE THE R EMUNERATION ETC. IS BEING RECEIVED WHICH CANNOT BE HELD AS NON TAXABLE. THE SUBMISSION IS NOT SUPPORTED BY FACTS AND FIGURES. IN VIEW OF THIS, THE CONTENTION RAISED BY THE APPELLANT IS HEREBY REJECTED. THE AO HAS MADE ADDITION WITH PROPER JUSTIFICA TION, HO WEVER, THE FIGURES ONLY REQUIRED TO BE ADJUSTED AS PER NARR ATIVES ABOVE. THE APPELLANT HAS ALSO NOT RELIED ON THE RATIO OF ANY CASE LAW SO AS TO GET THE BENEFIT PROVIDED THE RATIO IS SUPPORTING HIS CASE. I ALSO DON'T FIND ANY FINDING FAVOURING APPELLANT ON THIS ISSUE EVEN IN OTHER ASSESSMENT YEARS. THEREFORE, THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS.6,24,008/ - IS CONFIRMED AS THE BORROWED FUNDS HAVE NOT BEEN PROVED IN ANY MANNER TO HAVE BEEN UTILIZED FOR EARNI NG TAXABLE INCOME . THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE DISMISSED. 5 . WE HA VE HEARD THE RIVAL CON T E N TIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD CAREFULLY. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSES SMENT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER I.T.A NO. 2610 /AHD/20 17 A.Y. 2014 - 15 PAGE NO SHRI NITISH PRAFULCHANDRA AGARWAL VS. IT O 3 NOTICED THAT ASSESSEE WAS HAVING INTEREST INCOME OF RS. 11,88,870/ - , HOWEVER, HE HAD CLAIMED INTEREST EXPENSES TO THE AMOU NT OF RS. 18,21,878/ - WHICH RESULTED IN EXCESS DEDUCTION OF INT E REST PAYMENT TO THE AMOUNT OF RS. 6 , 24 , 008/ - . THE ASSESSEE COUL D NOT EXPLAIN THE DIFFERENCE O F RS. 6,24, 008/ - , THEREFORE, THE SAME WAS ADDED TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. AFTER PERUS AL OF THE DETAILED FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A) AS ELABORATED ABOVE IN THIS ORDER, WE CONSIDER THAT ASSESSEE COULD NOT DEMONSTRATE WITH REL EVANT MATERIAL THAT THE BORROWED FUNDS WERE USED FOR INVESTMENT IN THE PARTNERSHIP FIRM WHICH THE NON - TAXABLE REMUNERAT ION WAS RECEIVED. IN THE LIGHT OF THE ABOVE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES , WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE DECISION OF THE LD. CIT(A), THEREFORE, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED . 6 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PR ONOUNCED IN THE OPEN C OURT ON 27 - 06 - 201 9 SD/ - SD/ - ( RAJPAL YADAV ) ( AMARJIT SINGH ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD : DATED 27 /06 /2019 / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. ASSESSEE 2. REVENUE 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , / ,