2023 (3) TMI 555 - AT - Income Tax

Assessee's Appeal Partially Allowed: Interest Expense Justified, Depreciation Disallowed

The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. Ground number 1 was allowed as the Tribunal held that no disallowance of interest expense of Rs. ... Disallowance of interest expenses - assessee on one hand had paid interest on borrowed funds, whereas on the other hand had given interest free loans to its sister concerns and promoters - HELD THAT:- We observe that during the year under consideration, the assessee had substantial interest free funds to the tune of ₹ 9 crores as own funds at its disposal. Further, the assessee submitted before us copy of the ledger account of the parties to whom the aforesaid advances were made and it is evident that the said advances were made in the earlier assessment years. In the case of CIT v. Reliance Industries Ltd [2019 (1) TMI 757 - SUPREME COURT] held that where AO rejected assessee's claim u/s 36(1)(iii) taking a view that interest would not have been payable to banks if funds were not provided to subsidiaries, in view of fact that interest free funds were available to assessee which were sufficient to meet its investment in subsidiaries, appellate authorities were justified in allowing assessee's claim for deduction. Accordingly, since the assessee is having substantial interest free funds at its disposal amounting to ₹ 9 crores as against an advance of 19.7 lakhs approximately advanced to sister concerns, we are of the view that addition on this count cannot be sustained. Disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) - assessee claimed rent expenses and the AO discovered that the assessee had not deducted TDS on rent - HELD THAT:- We observe that the assessee had filed a detailed chart giving details of rent before the assessing Officer vide submission dated 07-10-2014, however, evidently the same was not taken cognizance by the Revenue Authorities. Before us, assessee submitted that the assessee has correctly deducted TDS on rent as per law. TDS was not deducted only in cases where either the payment of rent was below the threshold limit or the recipient of rental income had furnished a lower tax withholding the certificate furnishing the rate at which taxes were to be deducted by the assessee. Accordingly, evidently the detailed chart filed by the assessee regarding TDS on rent payments, furnished during the course of assessment proceedings was not properly examined by the AO, we are hereby restoring the matter to the file of AO for proper examination of the details of rent paid and TDS deducted thereon, after giving due opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Disallowance of depreciation - HELD THAT:- We observe that identical set of facts and identical submissions on this issue were already made before the AO by the assessee during the course of assessment for assessment year 2009-10. In the said assessment order, the AO denied the assessee’s claim for depreciation after discussing the issue in detail. Similar observations were also made by the AO in the assessment order for the present year as well. We find no infirmity in the order of ld. CIT(A) and we are not inclined to interfere with the order of CIT(Appeals) for the present year as well. Issues involved:1. Disallowance of interest expense of Rs. 2,36,855/-2. Disallowance of Rs. 19,07,213/- and Rs. 2,36,900/- u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act3. Disallowance of depreciation of Rs. 4,29,627/-Issue 1: Disallowance of interest expense of Rs. 2,36,855/-The assessee had given interest-free advances to certain parties, leading to a disallowance of proportionate interest by the Assessing Officer. The CIT(A) upheld the disallowance, stating that the appellant failed to provide adequate evidence to support the claim. However, the Tribunal noted that the assessee had substantial interest-free funds of Rs. 9 crores, far exceeding the advances made. Citing the case of CIT v. Reliance Industries Ltd., the Tribunal held that no disallowance could be justified under the circumstances. Consequently, ground number 1 of the appeal was allowed.Issue 2 and 3: Disallowance of Rs. 19,07,213/- and Rs. 2,36,900/- u/s 40(a)(ia) of the ActThe AO disallowed Rs. 19,07,213/- and Rs. 2,36,900/- under section 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of TDS on rent. The CIT(A) upheld the disallowance, stating that the assessee failed to furnish sufficient evidence to support their claim. However, the Tribunal observed that the detailed chart provided by the assessee regarding TDS on rent payments was not properly examined by the Revenue Authorities. As a result, the matter was remanded back to the AO for a thorough examination of the details, with due opportunity given to the assessee. Grounds number 2 and 3 were allowed for statistical purposes.Issue 4: Disallowance of depreciation of Rs. 4,29,627/-The AO disallowed the depreciation claimed by the assessee on plant and machinery and vehicle, based on previous assessment orders. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal, citing lack of material on record to support the claim. The Tribunal noted that similar submissions were made in previous assessments, where the claim was also denied. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the decision of the CIT(A) on this issue, and ground number 4 was dismissed.In conclusion, the Tribunal partly allowed the appeal of the assessee, allowing ground number 1 and grounds number 2 and 3 for statistical purposes, while dismissing ground number 4.