TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal allows interest deduction for land development business, overturning disallowance decision</h1> <h3>Sumangla Developers & Farms Private Limited Versus The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai</h3> Sumangla Developers & Farms Private Limited Versus The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai - TMI Issues:- Disallowance of interest by AO and confirmation by CIT(A).- Justification for disallowance of interest.- Appeal against disallowance before Tribunal.Analysis:1. Disallowance of Interest by AO and Confirmation by CIT(A):- The appellant's appeal arose from the CIT(A)'s order confirming the AO's disallowance of interest amounting to Rs. 25,93,056. The appellant contended that the interest was related to business activities, while the authorities raised concerns regarding the lack of evidence supporting the claim that the funds were acquired for business purposes.2. Justification for Disallowance of Interest:- The AO disallowed the interest claim as the appellant failed to provide sufficient evidence to establish that the substantial interest-bearing advances were utilized for the real estate business. The CIT(A) upheld the disallowance, emphasizing the requirement under section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act for interest deduction only on capital borrowed for business purposes. The appellant's inability to justify the borrowing of funds solely for business led to the disallowance.3. Appeal Against Disallowance Before Tribunal:- The Tribunal heard arguments from both sides. The appellant, engaged in land development and construction, explained that the loans were intended for business purposes, supported by a resolution passed by the Board of Directors. The Tribunal noted that the AO did not dispute the genuineness of the interest payments or the purpose of the loans. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the appellant's claim, stating that once the genuineness and purpose were established, the interest could not be disallowed. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, overturning the disallowance.This comprehensive analysis outlines the key issues, the reasoning behind the disallowance of interest, and the subsequent successful appeal before the Tribunal.
TaxTMI 