CLASSIC CITI INVESTMENT PVT.LTD,PUNE vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -1, PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1317/PUN/2017Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 August 2023AY 2012-134 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal upheld the Principal CIT's view, stating that foreign exchange loss on loans for capital assets is not deductible as per Supreme Court judgment. The Assessing Officer erred by allowing this deduction without proper inquiry.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed a deduction for foreign exchange loss on loans taken for capital purposes. The Principal CIT initiated proceedings under Section 263, holding the assessment order to be erroneous and prejudicial to revenue.

What were the issues?

Whether foreign exchange loss on foreign currency loans taken for capital assets is an allowable deduction. Whether the assessment order was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH, ‘B’ PUNE

Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL & SHRI S.S.VISWANETHRA RAVI

For Appellant: Shri Sanket Joshi
For Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Kesari

आदेश / ORDER

PER R.S. SYAL, VP :

1.

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dt. 27-03-2017 passed by the Pr.CIT-1, Pune u/s.263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) in relation to the assessment year 2012-13.

2.

It is a recalled matter inasmuch as the earlier ex parte order passed by the Tribunal on 11-09-2020 was subsequently recalled vide its later order dated 10-07-2023 in M.A.No.32/PUN/2023.

3.

Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return declaring certain amount of loss. In the assessment completed u/s.143(3), the income was again determined at a loss but with a different figure. The ld. Pr.CIT, on perusal of records, observed that the assessee had borrowed funds for construction of its hotel building and acquiring other fixed assets. The assessee claimed deduction towards foreign exchange loss amounting to Rs.6,23,43,841/- in the Profit and loss account. Since the amount was borrowed in foreign currency for acquisition of certain capital assets, the ld. Pr.CIT opined that Assessing Officer (AO) wrongly granted deduction in respect of such foreign exchange loss. He, therefore, held the assessment order to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue and directed the AO to examine the eligibility of deduction claim on account of foreign exchange loss of Rs.6.23 crore. Aggrieved thereby, the assessee has come up in appeal before the Tribunal.

4.

Having heard the rival submissions and gone through the relevant material on record, it is seen that the assessee is engaged in the business of running hotels at Pune and Nagpur. Certain amount of loan was taken in foreign currency for capital purposes. Loss on foreign exchange fluctuation in respect of such loan amounting to Rs.6.23 crore was claimed as deduction. The same could not have been allowed as deduction in terms of the judgment of Hon’ble Ltd.(2009) 312 ITR 254 (SC). The AO, without conducting any enquiry on this issue, finalized the assessment u/s.143(3) and eventually allowed the deduction. In view of the fact that such foreign exchange fluctuation loss is not deductible as it pertains to loans taken for capital purposes, the AO by allowing deduction for this sum, passed an erroneous order which was prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. In our considered opinion, no exception can be taken to the view canvassed by the ld. Pr.CIT in this regard.

We, therefore, upold the same.

5.

In the result, the appeal is dismissed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 22nd August, 2023.

Sd/- Sd/- (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) (R.S.SYAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT पुणे Pune; िदनांक Dated : 22nd August, 2023 सतीश आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: अपीलाथ� / The Appellant; 1. ��थ� / The respondent 2. The Pr.CIT concerned 3. 4. DR, ITAT, ‘B’ Bench, Pune गाड� फाईल / Guard file. 5. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune

Date 1. Draft dictated on 16-08-2023 Sr.PS 2. Draft placed before author 16-08-2023 Sr.PS 3. Draft proposed & placed before JM the second member 4. Draft discussed/approved by JM Second Member. 5. Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS Sr.PS/PS 6. Kept for pronouncement on Sr.PS 7. Date of uploading order Sr.PS 8. File sent to the Bench Clerk Sr.PS 9. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk 10. Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11. Date of dispatch of Order. *

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →