TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (3) TMI 1156
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....A No.1062/Hyd/2018 pertains to the deletion of disallowance made by the Assessing Officer by the learned CIT (A) which reads as under: ITA No.1061/Hyd/2018 - Ground No:2 "(ii) The learned CIT (A) ought to have appreciated the addition of Rs. 1,70,212/- made by the Assessing Officer in accordance with the CBDT Circular No.22/2015 towards late remittance of PF (Rs. 1,48,417) and ESI (Rs. 21,795/-) and requires to be upheld. ITA No.1602/Hyd/2018 - Ground No.3 "(iii) The learned CIT (A) ought to have appreciated the addition of Rs. 5,24,344/- made by the Assessing Officer in accordance with the CBDT Circular No.22/2015 towards late remittance of PF (Rs. 4,78,378) & ESI (Rs. 45,966/-) as requires to be upheld". 3. The ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f interest from 16% to 8% on the loans advanced by the assessee to the sister concerns. 8. In this regard the learned DR submitted that the learned CIT (A) had granted relief to the assessee and our attention was drawn to para 10.1 to 10.3 of the order passed by the learned CIT (A). It was submitted by the learned DR that this is contrary to the case of the assessee's own case for the A.Ys 2008-09 and 2009-10 in ITA No.629/Hyd/2012 vide paras 26 & 27 which are to the following effect: "26. We find that the AO was silent on the interest free funds received by the assessee from its sister concerns. We are of the view that if the assessee has got surplus funds which do not carry interest and also as other borrowals like bank overdr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ned AR had relied upon the order passed by the learned CIT (A) and submitted that the issue is required to be examined based on the above-said decision of the Tribunal. He also relied on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of the assessee in ITA No.629/Hyd/2012 vide paras 26 & 27 which are reproduced herein above. 10. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. In the present case, admittedly, the assessee is not in appeal against the partial relief granted by the learned CIT (A) to the assessee. From the perusal of the paras produced herein above, the learned CIT (A) has restricted the interest @ 8% as against 16% disallowed by the Assessing Officer. Against the restriction of the interest at 8....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....or the assessee may be correct. But in the absence of any cross objection raised / appeal by the assessee against the order passed by the learned CIT (A) it is not possible to grant any relief to the assessee in the appeal filed by the revenue. Therefore, in our view, the findings given by the learned CIT (A) cannot be faulted with ld.CIT(A) as he had examined the availability of funds and thereafter had restricted the interest at 8% . 11.2 In our view, the view of the learned CIT (A) is accordance with law and therefore the appeal of the revenue is dismissed. In light of the above, the ground raised by the Revenue in both appeals are dismissed. 12. Ground No.3 in ITA No.1061/Hyd/2018 reads as under: "iii. The learned CIT (A)....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....3 The total disallowance in respect of the above heads of expenditure works out to Rs. 2,86,63,051/-". 14. The learned DR submitted that the learned CIT (A) upheld the entire disallowances made by the Assessing Officer and she drew our attention to para 9.2 and 9.3 of the order of the learned CIT (A) which are to the following effect: "9.2 Before me, the appellant submitted that the appellant has been accounting for both categories as one indivisible business and all expenses are vouched and verifiable. The appellant submitted that strict bifurcation may not be possible as both activities are interlinked. The appellant submitted that the entire disallowance is arbitrary, untenable and cannot be sustained. The appellant ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t the order passed by the learned CIT (A) is without any merit. The lumpsum pro rata addition made by the Assessing Officer is required to be upheld and the order of the learned CIT (A) is required to be dismissed. 16. The learned AR for the assessee, on the other hand, drew our attention to the letter filed by the assessee dated 26.03.2015 before the Assessing Officer wherein the assessee has submitted details of expenses, and our attention was also drawn to the chart prepared by the assessee filed before the Assessing Officer to that effect. 17. We have perused the material available on record. The Assessing Officer in the order passed by him has mentioned that the assessee has not filed the requisite bills/vouchers/documents substa....