AKS Homes & Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi V. ITO WARD - 2(1), New Delhi

ITA 4893/DEL/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6892 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-10-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 29-05-2019
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: EKTA VISHNOI
• Section: 143(3); 143(1); 143(2)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: SMC NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 4893/DEL/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-14 AKS HOMES & INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD. H. NO. 10, FF, NORTH AVENUE ROAD, PUNJABI BAGH, NEW DELHI. PAN NO. AAFCA9903N VS ITO WARD 2(1) NEW DELHI. APPELLANT RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY SHRI UPVAN GUPTA, ADVOCATE REVENUE BY MS. EKTA VISHNOI, SR. DR ORDER THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE IMPUG NED ORDER DATED 29.03.2019 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(APPEALS)-32, NEW DELHI IN RELATION TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 ON THE FOLLOWIN G GROUNDS: 1. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-32, NEW DELHI GROSSLY ERRED IN PARTLY UPHOLDING THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN MAKING VARIOUS ADDITIONS/DISALLOWANCES TO THE RETURNED INCOME OF THE APPELLANT. 2. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE CIT(A) GROSSLY ERRED 2 ITA NO . 4893/DEL/2019 IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN MAKING AN ADDITION OF RS. 4,90,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNSECURED LOAN, WITHOUT APPRECIATING THAT THE SAME WAS PROPERLY EXPLAINED AND RECORDED IN BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. 2.1 THAT THE CIT(A) GROSSLY ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN CONFIRMING THE AFORESAID ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITHOUT APPRECIATING THAT CONFIRMATION IN RESPECT OF UNSECURED LENDER, VIZ., MS. ASHA RANI WAS DULY SUBMITTED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER/CIT(A). 2.2 THAT THE CIT(A) GROSSLY ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN CONFIRMING THE AFORESAID ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITHOUT APPRECIATING THAT THE ABOVE MENTIONED UNSECURED LENDER HAD GRANTED LOAN TO APPELLANT OUT OF SAVINGS MADE OVER A NUMBER OF YEARS. 2.3 THAT THE CIT(A) GROSSLY ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN CONFIRMING THE AFORESAID ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITHOUT APPRECIATING THAT THE ABOVE MENTIONED UNSECURED LENDER WAS NOT REQUIRED TO FILE TAX RETURN, SINCE, HER TAXABLE INCOME WAS LESS THAN THE BASIC TAX EXEMPTION LIMIT. 3. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE CIT(A) GROSSLY ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN MAKING A DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 2,50,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST ON UNSECURED LOAN UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 36(1)(III) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 3.1 THAT THE CIT(A) GROSSLY ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN CONFIRMING THE AFORESAID DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITHOUT APPRECIATING THAT THE APPELLANT HAD SUFFICIENT INTEREST FREE/OWN FUNDS AVAILABLE TO GRANT LOAN TO DIRECTORS WHILE INTEREST BEARING FUNDS WERE NOT UTILIZED FOR DOING SO. 3 ITA NO . 4893/DEL/2019 THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, AMEND OR VARY THE ABOVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ON OR BEFORE THE DATE OF HEARING. 2. I HAVE HEARD THE BOTH PARTIES AND PERUSED THE OR DERS PASSED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITY ALONG WITH THE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE COUNSEL IN THE SHAPE OF PAPER BOOK IN WHICH THE ASSESSEE COUNSEL HAS ATTACHED COPY OF THE ACKNO WLEDGEMENT OF RETURN OF INCOME OF THE APPELLANT ALONG WITH COMPUT ATION OF TAXABLE INCOME FOR THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR, CO PY OF AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF THE APPELLANT FOR THE RELEV ANT ASSESSMENT YEAR, COPY OF CONFIRMATION OF MS. ASHA RANI, COPY O F BROAD SUBMISSIONS FILED BEFORE THE CIT(A) AND COPY OF THE DECISION OF DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MODI RUBBER LTD. : 378 ITR 128. 3. AFTER HEARING THE BOTH PARTIES, I FIND THAT ASSE SSEE FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME OF RS. 7,13,334/- ON 30.09.2013 WH ICH WAS PROCESSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S 143(1) OF TH E INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. LATER ON AO ISSUED NOTICE U/S 143(2) TO THE ASSESSEE, IN COMPLIANCE OF THE SAME, AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIV E OF THE ASSESSEE APPEARED AND FILED DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF THE CLAIM. AFTER CONSIDERING THE DOCUMENTARY EVIDE NCE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE THE AO MADE VARIOUS ADDITIONS IN THE ASSES SMENT ORDER INCLUDING THE ADDITIONS IN DISPUTE IN THIS APPEAL A ND COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT ON 26.03.2016. 4 ITA NO . 4893/DEL/2019 4. AGGRIEVED BY THE SAME, THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APP EAL BEFORE THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY WHO VIDE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 29.03.2019 PARTLY ALLOWED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE A SSESSEE AND DELETED THE VARIOUS ADDITIONS MENTIONED IN THE IMPU GNED ORDER BUT SUSTAINED THE ADDITION IN DISPUTE IN THE PRESEN T APPEAL. 5. I AM OF THE VIEW THAT AS REGARD TO THE ADDITION OF RS. 4,90,000/- THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN THE UNSECURED LOA N FROM MS. ASHA RANI, BUT ASSESSEE HAS ONLY FILED CONFIRMATION FROM HER. ACCORDING TO THE ORDER OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES M S. ASHA RANI WAS NOT FILING ANY INCOME TAX RETURN AND WAS NOT HA VING TAXABLE INCOME. THEREFORE, IN MY VIEW THE LD. FIRST APPELL ATE AUTHORITY HAS RIGHTLY UPHOLD THE ADDITION OF RS. 4,90,000/- O N ACCOUNT OF UNSECURED LOAN FROM MS. ASHA RANI. IN MY VIEW NO I NTERFERENCE IS CALLED FOR IN THE WELL REASONED ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY FOR SUSTAINING THE ADDITION OF RS. 4,90,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNSECURED LOAN FROM MS. ASHA RANI BEC AUSE MS. ASHA RANI WAS NOT HAVING CREDITWORTHINESS TO ADVANC E LOAN TO THE ASSESSEE COMPANY . I UPHOLD THE ORDER ON THIS ISSU E. AS REGARD TO THE OTHER ADDITION OF RS. 2,50,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST ON UNSECURED LOAN UNDER THE PROVISION OF SECTION 36(1) (III) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. AFTER HEARING THE BOTH PARTI ES AND PERUSING THE RELEVANT RECORD AVAILABLE WITH ME. I AM OF THE VIEW THAT A SUM OF RS. 2,50,000/- WAS PAID AS INTEREST O N ACCOUNT OF UNSECURED LOAN TAKEN FROM ONE SHRI SHASHI AGGARWAL AND ASSESSEE HAS ALSO FORWARDED LOANS AND ADVANCES TO T HE TUNE OF RS. 78,68,496/- WHICH INCLUDES LOAN BEING FORWARDED TO THE DIRECTORS 5 ITA NO . 4893/DEL/2019 SH. ARUN SEHGAL AND MS. NEERU SEHGAL DURING THE YEA R UNDER CONSIDERATION. THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT ESTABLISH BE FORE THE REVENUE AUTHORITY ABOUT THE PAYMENT OF RS. 2,50,000 /- ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST ON UNSECURED LOANS UNDER THE PR OVISIONS OF SECTION 36(1)(III) OF THE ACT, THOUGH REASONS MENTI ONED BY THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY IN THE PARA NOS. 6.4 AND 6.4.1 AT PAGES 13 & 14 IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER. IN MY VIEW NO INTER FERENCE IS CALLED FOR IN THE WELL REASONED ORDERS PASSED BY TH E LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY FOR SUSTAINING THE ADDITION OF RS. 2,50,000/-. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- (H.S. SIDHU) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 31/10/2019 *KAVITA ARORA COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT TRUE COPY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI 6 ITA NO . 4893/DEL/2019