TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (6) TMI 596
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aw the CIT(A) erred in confirming the order of the AO in disallowing the interest of Rs. 13,08,070/- without appreciating the facts of the case. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the order of AO in disallowing Rent Expenses of Rs. 4,92,000/- without appreciating the facts of the case. 3. The appellant craves leave to add/alter/modify any/all grounds of appeal." 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of income declaring total income to the tune of Rs. 6,26,68,830/- for the A.Y.2015-16 and book profit in sum of Rs. 6,69,07,163/- u/s 115JB of the Income tax Act, 1961. Thereafter, the assessee filed the revised return of income on 29.03....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e filed an appeal before the CIT(A) who partly allowed the claim of the assessee but the assessee was not satisfied on the grounds mentioned above, therefore, the assessee has filed the present appeal before us. ISSUE NO.1 4. Under this issue the assessee has challenged the disallowance of interest of Rs. 13,08,070/-. At the very outset, the Ld. Representative of the assessee has argued that the issue has duly been covered by the decision of the Hon'ble ITAT in the assessee's own case in ITA. No.3999/Mum/2018 for the A.Y.2014-15 dated 10.07.2020, therefore, the interest is liable to be allowed in the in interest of justice. However, on the other hand, the Ld. Representative of the Department has refuted the said contention. Before goi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., respectfully following the same, set-aside the order of ld. CIT(A) and direct the Assessing Officer to delete the disallowance." 5. In this year also the situation is not different. The assessee made advance payment of Rs. 1,01,38,081/- for purchase of flats/office premises for investment purposes. During the year under consideration, out of free reserve and surplus at the start of year i.e. as on 01.04.2014 which were Rs. 92,23,29,567/- (Rs. 92,59,58,257/- Reserve & Surplus Less Rs. 36,28,690/- Revaluation Reserve). The profit was to the tune of Rs. 11,22,99,267/-after tax in sum of Rs. 4,60,29,360/- plus Depreciation Rs. 6,62,69,907/-. The finding of the case decided by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court titled as CIT Vs. Reliance Utiliti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....014 and 1.10.2014 to 30.09.2017 lies at page no. 6 to 12 and 13 to 19 on the file. The rent agreement speaks about this fact that the property was taken for the business purposes. Rent has also been mentioned in the agreement. The assessee also book the property on Lonavla on rent in sum of Rs. 10,000/- per month which was for the residence of employees. The TDS was deducted from every property. Nothing is on record to which it can be assumed that the property was not used for the business purposes. At least, it is necessary on the part of the AO to collect same material to which it can be assumed that the property was not taken on rent for the business purposes. The copy of agreement with regard to the residential property at Vapi dated 01....