2022 (11) TMI 475

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Post with Acknowledge Due (RPAD). The said notice returned un-served with an endorsement dated 13.09.2022 that "addressee left". The assessee called absent and said ex-parte. Therefore, we proceed to hear the ld. DR and pass a consolidated order by examining the material available on record. 3. We find no representative on behalf of the assessee nor any application for seeking adjournment. 4. Since the issue raised in both the appeals are similar based on same identical facts therefore, with the consent of ld. DR, we proceed to hear both the appeals together. 5. First, we shall take up ITA No.540/PUN/2019 for A.Y. 2013-14. 6. Brief facts relating to case are that the assessee is a company engaged in the business of hotel and de....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e of the assessee but advanced for investment in properties. On perusal of the assessment order, we note that the Assessing Officer asked the assessee as to why interest on the said investment should not be disallowed u/s 36(1)(iii) of the Act. We find no submissions whatsoever made by the assessee to the show-cause issued by the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer proceeded to disallow of interest at the rate of 15% placing reliance in the case of Ravindra Singh Arora vs. ACIT reported in 53 SOT 124 (Hyderabad) and made disallowance of Rs.58,65,000/- (Rs.3,91,00,000/- @ 15%) on account of interest on loans/advances for non-business purpose. It is noted from the impugned order that the CIT(A) has given 13 notices intimating dates for h....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ee challenging the action of the CIT(A) in confirming the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer u/s 14A r.w. Rule 8D of the I.T. Rules. 11. We note that the assessee made average investments of Rs.5,16,69,494/-. The assessee was asked to show cause as to why the provisions of section 14A r.w. Rule 8D should not be applied. It appears from para 5 of the assessment order that the assessee filed submissions but, however, not found acceptable to the Assessing Officer. Further, it is noted no details were furnished by the assessee regarding the profits accumulated by the assessee and its utilization for investments in subsidiary company. Further, the Assessing Officer by applying Rule 8D(2)(ii) and 8D(2)(iii) made disallowance u/s 14A fo....