2012 (5) TMI 690 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal allows appeal, deletes interest disallowance under section 36(1)(iii)

The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, setting aside the CIT(A)'s order and deleting the addition of &8377; 8,64,821 for interest disallowance ... Disallowance of interest under section 36(1)(iii) - Held that:- Assessee during the year had own funds of ₹ 4.40 crores and interest from the borrowings ₹ 8.13 crores, in addition to current year profit of ₹ 75.00 lacs. In our view the payment of ₹ 27.91 lacs during the year is easily explained from own funds. Even the current year profit can easily explain source of such payment. We, therefore, see no reason of making addition. We therefore set aside the order of CIT(A) and delete the addition made. Issues: Disallowance of interest under section 36(1)(iii) for acquisition of properties.Analysis:1. The appeal was against the disallowance of interest under section 36(1)(iii) for the assessment year 2007-08 related to the purchase of properties at Bharat Diamond Bourse and Gujarat Hira Bourse.2. The Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed interest proportionate to the payment made for property acquisition, totaling &8377; 8,64,821, as he believed the borrowed funds were utilized for the acquisition.3. The assessee contended that no borrowed funds were used for the property acquisition, supported by the balance sheet showing own funds of &8377; 4.40 crores and interest-free borrowings of &8377; 8.13 crores, with a profit of &8377; 75.00 lacs during the year.4. The Tribunal noted that most payments were made in earlier years, with only &8377; 27.91 lacs paid during the year, similar to the previous year where disallowances were deleted by the Tribunal.5. The Tribunal found the source of &8377; 27.91 lacs easily explained from the assessee's own funds and current year profit, leading to the deletion of the addition made by the CIT(A).6. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, setting aside the CIT(A)'s order and deleting the addition of &8377; 8,64,821 for interest disallowance under section 36(1)(iii).In conclusion, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, emphasizing that the payments made for property acquisition were adequately explained from the assessee's own funds and current year profit, leading to the deletion of the interest disallowance.