M/S SPECTRUM INNS AND MOTELS PVT. LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO, W-5(2), CHANDIGARH

PDF · subscribers
ITA 254/CHANDI/2019Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 October 2019AY 2014-154 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee's claim was not bonafide and that the Assessing Officer was justified in disallowing proportionate interest expenditure and initiating penalty proceedings.

What were the facts?

The assessee advanced an interest-free loan to an individual while claiming substantial interest expenditure. The assessee failed to provide any business exigency or explanation for this interest-free loan.

What were the issues?

Whether penalty under Section 271(1)(c) is leviable when interest expenditure is disallowed due to interest-free advances without business justification.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 36(1)(iii),Section 271(1)(c)

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.

आदेश/Order

Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:

The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 26.12.2018 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 2, Chandigarh [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’]

2.

The assessee in this appeal has agitated the imposition of penalty u/s 271 (1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act').

ITA No. 254/Chd/2019- M/s Spectrum Inns and Motels Pvt Ltd, Chandigarh 2 3. The brief facts of the case are that during the assessment

proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee firm

had advanced interest free loan worth Rs. 1,38,47,642/- to Smt.

Suman Lata, whereas, the assessee had claimed a sum of Rs.

63,21,153/- under the head ‘finance charges’ including interest to

banks and other. The Assessing Officer observed that on the one

hand the assessee had claimed heavy interest expenditure but at the

same time it had advanced interest free loans to one Smt. Suman Lata

without any business exigency. The assessee failed to explain the

purpose of loan given to Smt. Suman Lata. The Assessing Officer,

therefore, disallowed proportionate interest expenditure invoking the

provisions of section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act and added the

amount of disallowance into the income of the assessee. The

Assessing Officer also separately initiated penalty proceedings u/s

271(1)(c) of the Act and imposed the impugned penalty of Rs.

3,51,873/-.

4, The assessee unsuccessfully contested the matter before the Ld.

CIT(A).

5.

Before us, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that

the assessee’s case is covered by the decision of the Hon'ble

Supreme Court in the case of ‘ CIT vs Reliance Petro Products Ltd’

[2013] 322 ITR 158 and has submitted that the assessee has neither

ITA No. 254/Chd/2019- M/s Spectrum Inns and Motels Pvt Ltd, Chandigarh 3 furnished any inaccurate particulars of income nor has concealed its

income.

6.

On the other hand, the Ld. DR has relied upon the findings of

the lower authorities.

7.

We have considered the rival submissions of the Ld.

Representatives of the parties and gone through the record. A perusal

of the assessment order, penalty order as well as the impugned order

of the Ld. CIT(A) reveal that the assessee nowhere has stated the

purpose of advancing the interest free loan to one Smt. Suman Lata

and there is no pleading on the part of the assessee that it had not

used interest bearing funds to make the interest free advances to Smt.

Suman Lata. Under the circumstances, the Assessing Officer made

the impugned disallowance u/s 36(i)(iii) of the Act. No doubt every

disallowance does not ipso facto give rise to levy of penalty u/s 271

(1)(c) of the Act, however, at the same time, if it is established that

the assessee has filed inaccurate particulars of its income which

included a certain claim of expenditure which otherwise is not

genuine or is not relatable to the business activity of the assessee

and the assessee does not offer any explanation for the same, the

Assessing Officer can rightly invoke the provisions of section 271

(1)(c) of the Act. From the perusal of the facts of the case, it reveals

that the assessee nowhere has offered any explanation for advancing

ITA No. 254/Chd/2019- M/s Spectrum Inns and Motels Pvt Ltd, Chandigarh 4 the loan for non-business purposes from the interest bearing funds and for claiming interest expenditure on such funds as business

expenditure. The case law cited by the assessee is not applicable to the facts of the case as we do not deem the claim of the assessee as a bonafide claim. We, therefore, do not find any merit in this appeal of the assessee and the same is accordingly dismissed. In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 30.10.2019.

Sd/- Sd/- (अ�नपूणा� गु�ता / ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (संजय गग� / SANJAY GARG) लेखा सद�य/ Accountant Member �या�यक सद�य/ Judicial Member Dated : 30.10.2019 “आर.के.” आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant 2. ��यथ�/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�त/ CIT 4. आयकर आयु�त (अपील)/ The CIT(A) 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य आ�धकरण, च�डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. गाड� फाईल/ Guard File

आदेशानुसार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar

More judgments on Section 36(1)(iii)

All 3,665 judgments and leading authorities on Section 36(1)(iii) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →