Devvrat Impex Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi V. DCIT, Circle- 7(1), New Delhi

ITA 3405/DEL/2018

AI Insights

The case involves appeals by M/s Devvrat Impex Pvt. Ltd. against the orders of the CIT(A)-3, New Delhi, which pertained to the Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15. The primary issue was the disallowance of interest paid on unsecured loans from related parties, which was deemed excessive by the Assessing Officer (AO) under section 40A(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act. The AO disallowed the difference in interest rates paid to related parties (15%) and other parties (12%). The CIT(A) upheld this decision, leading to the appeals before the Tribunal. The Tribunal, after considering the submissions and the consistency of the treatment in previous and subsequent years, ruled in favor of the assessee, allowing the appeals and deleting the additions.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 121792 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 9 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-03-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 26-02-2023
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 08-05-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: RAKESH GUPTA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH, ‘B’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.3404 & 3405/DEL/2018 [Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15] M/s Devvrat Impex Pvt. Ltd. B-8, Ground Floor, Geetanjali Enclave, New Delhi-110017 Vs DCIT, Circle-7(1), New Delhi PAN-AABCD6134C Assessee Revenue Assessee by Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. Revenue by Sh. Pankaj Khanna, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 27.02.2023 Date of Pronouncement 03.03.2023 ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA, AM, These are appeals by the assessee against the respective orders of the Ld. CIT(A)-3, New Delhi, both dated 26.02.2018 and pertain to Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15 respectively. 2. Since, the issues are common and connected and the appeals were heard together, these are being consolidated and disposed of together for the sake of convenience by this common order. 3. For the sake of reference, we are referring to grounds of appeal for Assessment Year 2013-14 reads as under:- “1. The action of the AO in disallowing the sum of Rs.4,03,290/- out of interest paid by treating this amount as 2 ITA Nos.3404 & 3405/Del/2018 excessive and disallowable u/s 40A(2)(b) is unjust, illegal, arbitrary, illusory and the expense is fully allowable. 2. The action of the lower authorities in treating the interest paid @15% as highly excessive and thus disallowing a sum of Rs.4,03,290/- @ 3% and only allowing @12% is unjust, illegal, arbitrary, illusory and the full expense should be allowed.” 4. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee company is engaged in the business of distribution of plastic pipes and fittings. During the course of assessment proceedings, the AO noted that the assessee has paid interest of Rs.29,11,880/- on account of unsecured loans received from related parties of Rs.20,16,450/- @ 15% and Rs.8,95,430/- to other parties @ 12% in its profit & loss account. The AO was of the opinion that the difference of 3% is not allowable and accordingly he disallowed the difference of 3% u/s 40A(2)(b) of the Act. 5. Upon assessee’s appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of the AO by noting that no specific reason has been submitted for payment of higher interest to parties covered by section 40A(2)(b) of the Act. 6. Against the above order, the assessee is in appeal before us. 7. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee pleaded that the assessee has been paying same interest in earlier years as well as succeeding years and no disallowance has ever been made. Furthermore, he submitted there were genuine reasons due to which higher interest was paid to those parties. He submitted that these loans were obtained for company without any 3 ITA Nos.3404 & 3405/Del/2018 guarantee, etc and this was the reason why higher rate of interest was paid. 8. The Ld. DR could not controvert the submission of the ld. Counsel for the assessee. Accordingly, upon careful consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered opinion that the addition in this regard is not justified. We also note that the Revenue has not made any disallowance in earlier years as well as succeeding years. Hence, there is no change in the facts and circumstances then there is no reason to give different treatment for this year. This is also liable to set-aside. Hence, we set-aside the orders of the authorities below and delete the additions. 9. In the result, this appeal by the assessee stands allowed. 10. Our above order applies mutatis mutandis to both the assessment years. 11. Finally, both appeals of the assessee are allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 03rd March, 2023. Sd/- Sd/- [CHANDRA MOHAN GARG] [SHAMIM YAHYA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Delhi; Dated: 03.03.2023. f{x~{tÜ f{x~{tÜf{x~{tÜ f{x~{tÜ Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi