2021 (3) TMI 553

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) concerning AY 2014-15. 2. As per the grounds of appeal filed by the assessee, the assessee is aggrieved by the disallowance of Rs. 25,49,201/- towards interest expenses incurred on term loans availed by the assessee. 3. When the matter was called for hearing, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted at the outset that there is a delay of 73 days in filing the appeal for AY 2014-15 before the ITAT against the order of the CIT(A). In this connection, the learned counsel referred to the affidavit filed by the assessee dated 16th September, 2019 alongwith a petition of even date and urged for condonation of delay and disposal of the appeal on merits. Referring to the contents of the affidavit, ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cial statement of the assessee company for the year ended 31st March, 2015 which explains that loans from non-banking financial company including loan from SREI Equipments Pvt. Ltd. was secured against the asset belonging to holding company Corrtech International Pvt. Ltd. The loan was wrongly understood to have been taken for acquisition of capital asset which admittedly have not been acquired. The loan was only secured against the capital asset. It was submitted that this fact was duly brought to notice of the first appellate authority as well. As noted in para 2.2(3) of the first appellate order, it was alleged that after recording the relevant facts as represented on behalf of the assessee, the CIT(A) by a very cryptic order, dismissed ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e dismissed being barred by limitation when seen in conjunction with the merits involved in the case of the assessee. The short delay occurred in preferring appeal has also not shown to have caused any serious prejudice to the Revenue. It is the admitted position that assessee has not acquired any capital asset during the year and consequently, interest on loan facility obtained from the non-banking finance company has arisen to the assessee after the asset was put to use, even if, the loan was borrowed for acquisition of asset. The case on merit is prima facie tenable in the light of plethora of judicial precedents. The prima facie case on merits also gives an impression that the delay was not malafide per se. Hence, delay of 73 days in fi....