TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether loss of Rs. 251.30 crores arising on assignment of intercorporate receivables and payables to a related party is allowable as a bad debt under section 36(1)(vii) or as a business/trading loss under section 28(i); (ii) Whether interest expense disallowance of Rs. 158.12 crores (excess of interest paid over interest received on intercorporate deposits) is deductible under section 36(1)(iii); (iii) Whether interest expense of Rs. 171.57 crores incurred on loans raised for investment in Ennegaon Limited, Mauritius is deductible; (iv) Whether TDS credit of Rs. 2.29 crores should be granted; (v) Whether appellate order was vitiated by denial of personal hearing.
Issue (i): Whether the Rs. 251.30 crores loss on transfer of identified receivables and payables to a related party is deductible as a bad debt or business loss.
Analysis: The transaction involved intra-group assignment of assets (receivables/ICDs and accrued interest) and related liabilities on 31 March 2017; similar assets and liabilities were transferred to another group entity without loss. Company accounts showed the amount as an exceptional item; auditors gave a qualified opinion and directors' report referenced third party sale agreements and escrow arrangements which the assessee could not produce. Valuation material submitted (Grant Thornton reports) post dated the assignment and did not cover all receivables. The assessee failed to demonstrate attempts to recover debts prior to assignment, or that the transaction was not a round tripping/intragroup arrangement effected to book a notional loss. The tribunal found no write off of an irrecoverable debt in the ordinary course, and that the loss arose from a capital/investment type transaction shown in investing activities rather than operating activities; memorandum provisions for ancillary lending did not convert the activity into the assessee's business of terminals and handling.
Conclusion: Issue (i) decided against the assessee; the Rs. 251.30 crores loss is not allowable as a bad debt under section 36(1)(vii) nor as a business/trading loss under section 28(i).
Issue (ii): Whether disallowance of interest expenses of Rs. 158.12 crores (excess of interest expense over interest income on intercorporate deposits) was correct.
Analysis: The assessee borrowed funds and advanced them as ICDs to related entities, in some cases without charging interest; evidence of commercial expediency or that borrowed funds were used for business purposes was not furnished. Financial particulars showed limited equity and large ICD exposures; the lower authorities found absence of factual material proving use of borrowed funds for business and absence of commercial rationale for interest differential.
Conclusion: Issue (ii) decided against the assessee; the disallowance under section 36(1)(iii) is confirmed.
Issue (iii): Whether interest of Rs. 171.57 crores on borrowings used for investment in Ennegaon Limited, Mauritius is deductible.
Analysis: Additional documents including board note, bank sanction letters and subsidiary accounts were admitted as new evidence; these materials potentially bear on business purpose and commercial expediency. In absence of prior examination at assessment level, the tribunal directed remand to the assessing officer for fresh enquiry and verification of the admitted evidence, permitting the AO to examine facts, bank sanction letters, subsidiary accounts and grant hearing.
Conclusion: Issue (iii) allowed for adjudication on merits before the assessing officer; the ground is restored to the file for fresh decision (in favour of assessee for procedural remand but not a final tax allowance).
Issue (iv): Whether TDS credit of Rs. 2.29 crores should be granted.
Analysis: Both parties agreed the matter can be verified on records; the tribunal directed the assessing officer to verify and decide the claim on merits.
Conclusion: Issue (iv) allowed for verification and decision by the assessing officer (direction in favour of assessee for reconsideration).
Issue (v): Whether the appellate order was bad for lack of personal hearing.
Analysis: The ground was not argued and no evidence was produced before the tribunal.
Conclusion: Issue (v) dismissed against the assessee.
Final Conclusion: The appeal is partly allowed - appellate confirmation of disallowances relating to (i) loss on assignment of receivables (Rs. 251.30 crores) and (ii) excess interest disallowance (Rs. 158.12 crores) is upheld; issues concerning interest on overseas investment (Rs. 171.57 crores) and TDS credit (Rs. 2.29 crores) are remanded to the assessing officer for fresh verification and decision after admission of additional evidence.
Ratio Decidendi: A notional loss arising from an intra group assignment of financial assets and liabilities shown as an exceptional/investing transaction, unsupported by contemporaneous recovery efforts, valuation evidence predating the assignment, or access to underlying third party sale/escrow agreements, is not deductible as a bad debt under section 36(1)(vii) nor as a business loss under section 28(i); factual issues relying on newly admitted evidence must be remitted to the assessing officer for verification before allowing interest deductions raised for business purposes.
TaxTMI 
