TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (3) TMI 555
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... learned Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals)-11, Ahmedabad has erred in dismissing the appeal and whereby upholding the disallowance of interest expenses of Rs.2,36,855/- is unwarranted, unjustified and bad in law. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals)-11, Ahmedabad has erred in dismissing the appeal and whereby upholding the disallowance of Rs.19,07,213/- u/s. 40(a) (ia) of the IT Act is unwarranted, unjustified and bad in law. 3. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals)-11, Ahmedabad has erred in dismissing the appeal and whereby upholding the disallowance of Rs.2,36,900/- u/s. 40(a) (ia) of the IT Act is unwarranted, unjustified and bad in law. 4. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(Appeals) dismissed the appeal of the assessee with the following observations: "5.1 The AR of the appellant filed submissions in the office on 15.11.2016 when it was stated that as per Annexure-l the loan was given prior to 1996-97. It was claimed that copy of the assessment order for the AY 1999-2000 was enclosed the above submissions. However, after perusal of the submission, it was found that no such details were furnished except copy of ledger of Sri PD Vachan VD Vachhani, G.B Vachhani, KD Vachhani and that of the associated concerns, Swis Health Food P Ltd and Swiss Pack P Ltd (Dobhasa) for the accounting year 2000-02 to accounting year 2009-10 However, these details do not lead to a model evidence to establish that the advan....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the above facts, proportionate interest needs to be disallowed. 6. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record. We observe that during the year under consideration, the assessee had substantial interest free funds to the tune of Rs. 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. 410 ITR 466 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that where Assessing Officer rejected assessee's claim under section 36(1)(iii) taking a view that interest would not have been pay....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt only in cases where the rent was below the prescribed limit of Rs. 1,20,000/-. Moreover, two parties furnished certificate under section 197 of the Act for a lower rate of TDS on rent. Accordingly, the assessee has correctly deducted TDS on rental payments as above. However, Ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal of the assessee with the following observations: "6.3 After considering the facts of the case and remand report of the AO it was difficult to accept the contention of the assessee that TDS was not deducted on rent payment of Rs 1907213/- for the reason that payment of rent was below the limit prescribed for deduction of tax on rent in the case of many parties. As discussed above, the assessee did not furnish any evidence....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing Officer vide submission dated 07-10-2014, however, evidently the same was not taken cognizance by the Revenue Authorities. Before us, the counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee has correctly deducted TDS on rent as per law. The 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, in the interests of justice, looking into the facts of the case that evidently the detailed chart filed by the assessee regarding TDS on rent payments, furnished during the course of assessment proceedings was not properly examined b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....WDV at Rs.50577338/-. It was a mistake in carrying forward the WDV. Therefore, no further claim was made in the subsequent assessment years on the WDV of Rs.6866227/-. It was further submitted that he enclosed copies of returns of income and computation of income for the AY. 2005-06 and 2006-07 in Annexure-2 and separate calculation of depreciation as per Annexure-3 with the submissions. 7.2 The submission of the appellant was gone through and it was found that no such details were filed before the AO or in the appeal proceedings. In absence of the material on record it was not possible to allow the claim of the assessee only on the basis of the said submissions. Accordingly, the ground of appeal is dismissed." 14. The assessee ....