Shri Suresh K.Soni, Ahmedabad V. The Income tax Officer,Ward-8(1), Ahmedabad

ITA 2966/AHD/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 137 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0014 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-01-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 03-11-2009
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: C K MISHRA
• Assessee Lawyers: NAVIN C AMIN
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT AHMEDABAD - AHMEDABAD D BENCH (BEFORE DR.O.K. NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER) ITA NO.2966/AHD/2009 [ASSTT.YEAR : 2006-2007] SHRI SURESH K. SONI 207, SAMIR COMPLEX C.G. ROAD, AHMEDABAD. PAN : ADFPS 0314K VS. ITO, WARD-8(1) AHMEDABAD. ASSESSEE BY : SHRI NAVIN C. AMIN REVENUE BY : SHRI C.K.MISHRA DATE OF ORDER RESERVED : 04-01-2010 O R D E R PER DR. O.K. NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENT : THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006- 2007. THE APPEAL IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A)-XIV, AHMED ABAD DATED 09-09- 2009. THE APPEAL ARISES OUT OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 2. THE FIRST GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST OF RS.1, 26,819/- OUT OF THE TOTAL CLAIM OF INTEREST MADE BY THE ASSESSEE AMOUNTING RS .1,47,620/-. WE CONSIDERED THIS ISSUE. THE RATE OF INTEREST DISPUT ED BY THE AO IN THE PRESENT CASE IS VERY NOMINAL AT 2%. THE QUESTION I S WHETHER THE ASSESSEE IS JUSTIFIED IN PAYING INTEREST AT 12% WHILE THE AS SESSEE RECEIVED INTEREST AT 10% AGAINST THE ADVANCES GIVEN TO OTHERS. AN AR ITHMETICAL COMPARISON OF THESE MATTERS IS NOT ALWAYS RELEVANT. THE COMPA RISON MUST BE SUPPORTED BY APPARENT CONTRADICTIONS IN THE ATTITUD E OF THE ASSESSEE ON PAGE - 2 ITA NO.2966/AHD/2009 -2- SIMILAR SITUATIONS. THE RATE OF INTEREST IS MAINLY A MATTER OF STATUTORY REGULATIONS AND BUSINESS COMPULSIONS. IN THE PRESE NT CASE, THERE IS NO HARD GROUND TO DISALLOW THE NOMINAL DIFFERENTIAL RA TE OF 2%. WE DO NOT FIND JUSTIFICATION IN MAKING SUCH A DISALLOWANCE. THEREFORE, DISALLOWANCE OF RS.1,26,819/- IS DELETED. 3. THE SECOND GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.60,000/- MAD E BY THE AO TOWARDS THE LOW WITHDRAWAL TO MEET THE HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES. THIS ADDITION IS ON AN ESTIMATE BASIS AND HAS NO LEGS TO STAND. IT IS JUST AN AD HOC ADDITION. IT IS ACCORDINGLY DELETED. 4. IN RESULT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS AL LOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON WEDNESDAY THIS SIXTH DAY OF JAN UARY, 2010. SD/- SD/- (MAHAVIR SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER (DR.O.K. NARAYANAN) VICE-PRESIDENT PLACE : AHMEDABAD DATE : 06-01-2010 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1) : ASSESSEE 2) : RESPONDENT 3) : CIT(A) 4) : CIT CONCERNED 5) : DR, ITAT. BY ORDER DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD