1998 (1) TMI 19 - HC - Income Tax

Court rules only net interest considered for disallowance under Income-tax Act, following precedent.

The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, determining that only net interest should be considered for disallowance under section 40(b) of the ... Firm, Business Expenditure, Disallowance, Reference Issues:1. Interpretation of section 40(b) of the Income-tax Act regarding the treatment of interest payments.2. Determination of whether interest paid to a partner can be disallowed under section 40(b) when the partner obtained a loan for the firm.Analysis:The case involved the interpretation of section 40(b) of the Income-tax Act in relation to the treatment of interest payments made by a textile firm. The Income-tax Officer initially included both gross and net interest amounts in the disallowance under section 40(b). The firm had made interest payments to a partner, including interest on a loan obtained by the partner from Egmore Benefit Society for the firm's business. The Commissioner (Appeals) held that the interest paid to the partner could not be deducted from the interest received from the partner and that the entire interest paid should be disallowed under section 40(b.The Appellate Tribunal, however, held that only net interest should be considered for disallowance under section 40(b). Additionally, the Tribunal reasoned that the interest paid to the partner was actually a payment to Egmore Benefit Society, as the partner had obtained the loan on his individual responsibility and provided security from his own property. The Tribunal limited the disallowance amount to Rs. 4,369, as claimed by the assessee, and dismissed the Revenue's appeal against the Commissioner (Appeals) decision.Regarding the first question of law, the High Court referred to a Supreme Court decision in Keshavji Ravji and Co. vs Commissioner of Income-tax, which established that only net interest should be subject to disallowance under section 40(b). Therefore, the first question was answered in favor of the assessee. As a result, the High Court deemed it unnecessary to address the second question, as the disallowance amount had already been determined to be Rs. 4,369 by the Tribunal. The High Court concluded that the second question was academic in the context of the case and returned it unanswered.In summary, the High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision regarding the treatment of interest payments under section 40(b), relying on the Supreme Court precedent. The Court's judgment clarified the application of the law in this case and emphasized the importance of considering net interest for disallowance purposes under section 40(b) of the Income-tax Act.