No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR
Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 984/JP/2018
PER VIJAY PAL RAO, JM :
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 27th July,
2018 of ld. CIT (A)-3, Jaipur for the assessment year 2013-14. The assessee has
raised the following grounds :-
“ 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and law the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, erred in confirming disallowance of Rs. 1,61,782/- out of interest paid to relatives u/s 40a(2)(b) by restricting the rate of Interest @ 15% instead of 18% paid by the assessee.
That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and law the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in assessing the total income at Rs. 73,86,346/- as against non contested total income of Rs. 72,24,574/- declared by the assessee.”
2 ITA No. 984/JP/2018 Shri Naresh Kumar Luhadia, Jaipur.
The assessee is a proprietor of M/s. Kissan Pashu Aahar Udyog and derives
income from manufacturing and selling of cattle feed, trading of shares and income
from house property. The assessee filed his return of income on 23.09.2013
declaring total income of Rs. 70,90,920/-. The AO noted that the assessee has
taken loans from related parties @ 18% whereas the other loans were taken from
unrelated parties at lower rates. Accordingly, the AO restricted the payment of
interest to the related parties at 15% per annum and made disallowance of Rs.
1,61,782/- under section 40A(2)(b) of the IT Act. The assessee challenged the
action of the AO before the ld. CIT (A) but could not succeed.
Before us, the ld. A/R of the assessee has submitted that the assessee has
taken loans from 62 parties and paid total interest of more than Rs. 52 lacs. He has
further submitted that interest paid to the related parties is only Rs. 9,70,697/-. The
ld. A/R has further submitted that even otherwise in case of 18 unrelated parties the
assessee has taken loans @ 15% and 12% which are less than the rate of 18%
whereas for the remaining unrelated parties which is the majority of the cases the
loans were taken @ 18%. Therefore, the AO has picked up only the selected cases
where the loans were taken at less than 18% to compare with the loans taken from
the related parties instead of considering the complete facts of loans taken by the
assessee from the unrelated parties as well as the related parties. The ld. A/R has
further contended that even otherwise the loans taken from the unrelated parties
involve other costs, like processing fee, security etc. and further the repayment is as
per schedule whereas in case of loans taken from the related parties, there is no
other expenditure and repayment is as per the convenience of the assessee and not
as per the fixed schedule as in case of unrelated parties. The ld. A/R has relied
3 ITA No. 984/JP/2018 Shri Naresh Kumar Luhadia, Jaipur. upon the decision of Ahmedabad Bench of the Tribunal dated 9th July, 2010 in case
of Vipul Y. Mehta vs. ACIT in ITA No. 869/Ahd/2010 as well as decision of Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal dated 25th June, 2018 in the assessee’s own case
in ITA No. 64/JP/2018. Thus the ld. A/R has submitted that the addition made by
the AO of 3% under section 40A(2)(b) of the Act is not justified when in the
majority of the unrelated parties loans were taken @ 18%.
On the other hand, the ld. D/R has relied upon the orders of the authorities
below and submitted that there is no dispute that the assessee has paid interest to
the related parties @ 18% whereas the interest was paid to the unrelated parties @
15%. Therefore, the AO has rightly invoked the provisions of section 40A(2)(b) of
the Act and determined the fair rate of interest at 15% and disallowed the 3% of
interest paid to the related parties.
We have considered the rival submissions as well as the relevant material on
record. We note that the assessee has debited the total interest of Rs. 46,26,990/-
in the Profit & Loss account. The list of the parties, the amount of interest and rate
of interest are produced by the ld. CIT (A) at pages 3 to 7 as under :-
Sl. No. Name of the party Interest TDS Total Rate of Amt. Amt. Amt. interest. 1 Assam Edible Oils Ltd. 67500.00 7500.00 75000.00 15% 2 Mushkan Vinimay Pvt 129600.00 14400.00 144000.00 15% Ltd. 3. Alok Kumar Paharya 17025.00 1892.00 18917.00 15% 4. Laxmipat Paharya 7350.00 817.00 8167.00 15% 5. Shanta Bengani 22050.00 2450.00 24500.00 15%
4 ITA No. 984/JP/2018 Shri Naresh Kumar Luhadia, Jaipur.
5 ITA No. 984/JP/2018 Shri Naresh Kumar Luhadia, Jaipur.
6 ITA No. 984/JP/2018 Shri Naresh Kumar Luhadia, Jaipur.
Asha Ajmera 81000.00 9000.00 90000.00 15% 17 Kavita Jain dudu 67500.00 7500.00 75000.00 15% 18 Rajasthan Udyog 21600.00 2400.00 24000.00 12% TOTAL : 946622
7 ITA No. 984/JP/2018 Shri Naresh Kumar Luhadia, Jaipur.
Thus it is clear that there are 56 parties from whom the assessee has taken loans @
15% and @ 18% except in couple of cases where the rate of interest was 12%. We
further note that the assessee given the details wherein it was explained that out of
56 parties, only in case of 18 parties the interest was paid less than 18% i.e. 15%
and 12% in case of 3 parties. The remaining 38 parties have given the loans to the
assessee @ 18%. Thus the AO has considered the fair interest rate by selecting
these 18 cases and ignoring the remaining 38 parties. The interest paid to the
related parties is only about 10 cases and, therefore, comparing these 10 cases of
interest paid @ 18% against the selected parties where the interest was paid @
15% is not justified when the other 28 parties were paid the interest @ 18%.
Therefore, when there are comparable cases of unrelated parties at least in case of
28 parties to whom the assessee paid interest @ 18%, then instead of adopting the
rate of interest on charry fixed basis, the AO should have considered the complete
facts of payment of interest by the assessee to unrelated parties. We find that when
in the majority of the unrelated parties are paid by the assessee at 18%, then the
payment of interest to the related parties @ 18% is not unreasonable or excessive
having regard to the fact that there are various advantages of having the loans from
the related parties for repayment of loans as well as no collateral or other security is
required. Undisputedly, in case of unrelated parties, the repayment has to be made
strictly as per the schedule or agreement between the parties whereas in case of
related parties the repayment of loan is as per the convenience of the assessee and
there is an advantage of flexibility of repayment schedule. Accordingly, in view of
the fact that in the majority of unrelated parties the interest rate was 18%, this case
8 ITA No. 984/JP/2018 Shri Naresh Kumar Luhadia, Jaipur.
would not fall in the category of excessive or unreasonable interest paid to the
related parties, hence we delete the addition made by the AO in this regard.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed.
Order is pronounced in the open court on 26/10/2018.
Sd/- Sd/- (foØe flag ;kno) (fot; iky jkWo ½ (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV ) (VIJAY PAL RAO) U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member
Jaipur Dated:- 26/10/2018. Das/
आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेषित@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू
The Appellant- Shri Naresh Kumar Luhadia, Jaipur. 2. The Respondent – The DCIT, Circle-7, Jaipur. 3. The CIT(A). 4. The CIT, 5. The DR, ITAT, Jaipur 6. Guard File (ITA No. 984/JP/2018) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,
सहायक पंजीकार@ Aेेपेजंदज. त्महपेजतंत
9 ITA No. 984/JP/2018 Shri Naresh Kumar Luhadia, Jaipur.