SANJONA BUILDERS,MUMBAI vs. CIT(A), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2259/MUM/2021Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 May 2022AY 2016-173 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the matter to the CIT(A)'s file. The CIT(A) is directed to decide the issue along with the pending appeals for earlier assessment years.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal concerns the disallowance of interest on unsecured loans. The genuineness of these loans for earlier assessment years is still pending before the CIT(A). The allowability of the interest is dependent on the outcome of the loan genuineness issue.

What were the issues?

Whether the allowability of interest on unsecured loans is dependent on the genuineness of the loans themselves, and if so, whether the matter should be remanded for joint adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: HONBLE SHRI SANJAY GARG

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Sekhri & Ms. Mumtax
For Respondent: Shri Anil Gupta, DR
Hearing: 19.05.2022Pronounced: 19.05.2022
1.

The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 18/11/2021 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’).

2.

The assessee in this appeal has taken the following grounds of appeal:

“1. Ld. CIT(A) (NFAC) erred in passing appellate order without giving sufficient opportunity of being heard and hence the impugned order is bad in law.

2. The order passed by Ld. CIT(A) (NFAC) is bad in law and on facts.

4. Ld. CIT(A) (NFAC) erred in confirming the action of Ld. AO of reducing a sum of Rs 32,35,787/- from WIP Inventory of Abhilash Project, being interest amount on unsecured loans.”

3.

At the outset, the learned counsel for the assessee has submitted that certain loans shown to have been received by the assessee from certain parties were treated as bogus by the income tax authorities in the years relevant to A.Y. 2013-14 and A.Y. 2014-15. The corresponding payment of interest on such loans was also disallowed and added back. The matter relating to the genuineness of the loans transactions/ addition made by the lower authorities under section 68 of the Act is still pending before the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) in relation to the appeals for A.Ys. 2013-14 and 2014-15. The learned counsel has submitted that the question of the allowability of interest on such loans raised in this appeal is very much dependent upon the adjudication regarding the genuineness of the loan transactions. He therefore, submits that the matter in this appeal should be remanded to the file of the learned CIT (A) to be decided along with the appeals of the assessee for A.Y. 2013-14 and 2014- 15.

4.

The learned Departmental Representative has not objected to the same.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 19.05.2022.

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →