Tribunal dismisses revenue appeal, upholds CIT(A)'s decisions. Assessee's cross-objection allowed for statistical purposes.

The Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal and allowed the assessee's cross-objection for statistical purposes. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decisions on all issues, finding no infirmity in the well-reasoned findings.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Restriction of addition of Rs. 1,72,93,100/- to Rs. 15,24,100/- being interest payable by the assessee.
2. Deletion of addition of Rs. 1,26,04,397/- due to difference in sales prices of molasses.
3. Deletion of addition of Rs. 2,00,764/- due to difference in sales prices of bagasse.
4. Deletion of addition of Rs. 10,54,351/- on account of credit balance of creditors.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Restriction of Addition of Rs. 1,72,93,100/- to Rs. 15,24,100/- Being Interest Payable by Assessee:
The Assessing Officer (AO) noted that the assessee had shown interest accrued and due but not paid to Shakkar Vishesh Nidhi and the Government of U.P. The AO considered these loans as from public financial institutions and disallowed Rs. 1,72,93,100/- under section 43B(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee argued that these institutions are not public financial institutions as defined in section 4A of the Companies Act, 1956. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] restricted the addition to Rs. 15,24,100/- as the amount debited in the profit and loss account. The Tribunal found force in the assessee's contention that only Rs. 15,24,100/- was debited to the profit and loss account and remitted the issue back to the AO to examine whether Shakkar Vishesh Nidhi is a public financial institution as per section 43B(d) of the Act. The ground raised by the revenue was dismissed, and the ground raised by the assessee was allowed for statistical purposes.

2. Deletion of Addition of Rs. 1,26,04,397/- Due to Difference in Sales Prices of Molasses:
The AO made an addition of Rs. 1,26,04,397/- due to the difference in the sales price of molasses, comparing the selling rate of the assessee with Baghpat Cooperative Sugar Mills Ltd (BCSML). The CIT(A) opined that the basic assumption of the AO that the sales were understated could not be accepted without evidence. The CIT(A) noted that the AO did not provide any adverse comments on the books of accounts, which were audited and maintained regularly. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, noting that the AO did not reject the books of accounts and did not find any discrepancies. The Tribunal confirmed the deletion of the addition, rejecting the revenue's ground.

3. Deletion of Addition of Rs. 2,00,764/- Due to Difference in Sales Prices of Bagasse:
Similar to the issue with molasses, the AO made an addition of Rs. 2,00,764/- due to the difference in the sales price of bagasse. The CIT(A) deleted the addition for the same reasons stated for molasses. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, confirming that the AO did not find any discrepancies in the books of accounts and did not reject them. The Tribunal confirmed the deletion of the addition, rejecting the revenue's ground.

4. Deletion of Addition of Rs. 10,54,351/- on Account of Credit Balance of Creditors:
The AO noted that there were creditors outstanding for more than one year and treated them as non-genuine. The CIT(A) observed that the AO assumed the creditors were non-genuine without specifying the names or nature of transactions and without making any enquiry. The Tribunal found force in the assessee's contention that the payments were delayed due to liquidity issues and were settled in subsequent years. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, confirming the deletion of the addition and rejecting the revenue's ground.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal and allowed the assessee's cross-objection for statistical purposes. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decisions on all the issues, finding no infirmity in the well-reasoned findings. The order was pronounced in the open court on 28.04.2015.

---