Crustum Products Private Limited , Hyderabad V. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax , Circle-1(2), Hyderabad

MA 54/Hyd/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7813 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 23-11-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB-B
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 28-07-2021
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: P.MURALI MOHANA RAO

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B” : HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE) BEFORE SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A. No.54/HYD/2021 (Arising out of ITA No.946/Hyd/2019) Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s.Crustum Products Private Limited, HYDERABAD [PAN: AACCC5920C] Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(2), HYDERABAD (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri P.Murali Mohana Rao, AR For Revenue : Shri Rohit Mujumdar, DR Date of Hearing : 23-11-2021 Date of Pronouncement : 24-11-2021 O R D E R PER A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY, A.M. : This Miscellaneous Application is filed by the assessee pursuant to the order of the Tribunal dated 06-01-2021 in ITA No.946/Hyd/2019. 2. At the outset, Ld.AR submitted before us that the finding of the tribunal at para 7 of the Order is erroneous, wherein it is stated that the interest free fund owned by the assessee as on 31-03-2013 is only Rs.2,42,89,044/-, whereas factually the assessee had non-interest-bearing fund in the nature of un- MA No. 54/Hyd/2021 :- 2 -: secured loan to the extent of approximately Rs.18 crores. It was therefore pleaded that the appropriate rectification may be made in the order of the Tribunal. 3. Ld.DR, on the other hand argued, stating that there is no mistake in the order of the Tribunal that is required to be rectified. 4. We have heard the rival submissions through video conference and carefully perused the material on record. At the outset we find the submission of the Ld.AR to be erroneous. In para 7 of the order of the Tribunal, the Bench had also observed as under: “At the same time, it is also obvious that the Ld.AO has not considered the interest free fund available with the assessee during the period of interest free loan extended to its sister concern.” 4.1. It was further stated in the order that addition cannot be made in the hands of the assessee u/s.36(1)(iii) of the Act for extending interest free loan from its non-interest-bearing fund. 4.2. With these observations, the appeal of the assessee was remitted back to the file of Ld.AO to compute proportionate interest with respect to the interest-bearing fund extended to the assessee’s sister concern and thereafter pass appropriate order in accordance with law and on merits. Therefore, from the above it is obvious that the apprehension of the assessee that non-interest-bearing fund available with the assessee in the form of non-interest bearing un-secured loan was not considered in the order of the Tribunal is not correct as it is MA No. 54/Hyd/2021 :- 3 -: already addressed in the order of the Tribunal. Therefore, we do not find any merit in the submission of the Ld.AR. 5. In the result, the Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee is dismissed as indicated herein above. Order pronounced in the open court on 24 th November, 2021 Sd/- Sd/- (S.S.GODARA) (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Hyderabad, Dated: 24-11-2021 TNMM MA No. 54/Hyd/2021 :- 4 -: Copy to : 1.M/s.Crustum Products Private Limited, C/o. P.Murali & Co., Chartered Accountants, 6-3-655/2/3, 1 st Floor, Somajiguda, Hyderabad. 2.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(2), Hyderabad. 3. The CIT(Appeals)-1, Hyderabad. 4. The Pr.CIT-1, Hyderabad. 5. D.R. ITAT, Hyderabad. 6. Guard File.