What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the disallowed interest expense should not have been added back to short-term capital loss. Instead, the income from other sources should be assessed at the net figure after considering allowed interest expenses.

The assessee claimed interest expenses against interest income, resulting in a net loss. The Assessing Officer disallowed a significant portion of the interest expenses. The Tribunal had previously confirmed this disallowance.

What were the issues?

Whether the disallowed interest expense was correctly added back to short-term capital loss, and how income from other sources should be computed after partial disallowance of interest expenses.

Vimesh N. Zaveri HUF vs ITO | ITAT Mumbai 2020

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

For Appellant: Shri Kiran Mehta-Ld. AR

For Respondent: Shri Sanjay J. Sethi-Ld. DR

आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal is a recalled matter since the earlier order passed on 09/12/2019 has been recalled vide MA No.62/Mum/2010 order dated 29/10/2020 for limited purpose of adjudication of alternative ground that even if the interest disallowance was to be confirmed, the assessee could at the highest be assessed at income of Rs.85,775/-. After hearing Vimesh N. Zaveri HUF Assessment Year: 2013-14 both the sides, our adjudication to the alternative ground would be as per succeeding paragraphs.

Upon perusal of assessee’s computation of income, it is observed that the assessee has earned interest income of Rs.4,02,077/- and claimed interest expenses of Rs.31,32,720/- thereby reflected net loss of Rs.27,30,643/- under the head income from other sources. Out of interest expense of Rs.31,32,720/-, Ld. AO has disallowed interest expenses of Rs.28,16,418/- and allowed balance interest expense of Rs.3,16,302/-. The said disallowance has also been confirmed by the Tribunal in earlier order dated 09/12/2019.

However, while computing assessee’s income, Ld. AO has added back the interest disallowance of Rs.28,16,418/- in short-term capital loss of Rs.9,78,160/- and arrived at taxable income of Rs.18,38,258/-. The same is not correct since short term capital loss of Rs.9,78,160/- was to be carried forward to next year whereas the income under the head Income from Other Sources should have been assessed at Rs.85,775/- (Rs.4,02,077/- Less Rs.3,16,302/-) as against Rs,.18,38,260/- as assessed by Ld. AO. Therefore, we direct Ld. AO to rectify the computations in terms of our above observations. This ground stand allowed.

The appeal stand partly allowed to the extent stated in this order. Order pronounced on 22nd December, 2020 Sd/- Sd/- (Amarjit Singh) (Manoj Kumar Aggarwal) न्यायिक सदस्य / Judicial Member लेखा सदस्य / Accountant Member मुंबई Mumbai; यदनांक Dated : 22/12/2020 Sr.PS, Jaisy Varghese Vimesh N. Zaveri HUF Assessment Year: 2013-14 आदेशकीप्रधिधलधपअग्रेधर्ि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथी/ The Appellant 1. प्रत्यथी/ The Respondent 2. 3. आिकरआिुक्त(अपील) / The CIT(A) आिकरआिुक्त/ CIT– concerned 4. यवभागीिप्रयतयनयि, आिकरअपीलीिअयिकरण, मुंबई/ DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गार्डफाईल / Guard File 6.

VIMESH N. ZAVERI HUF,MUMBAI vs. ITO 17(3)(5), MUMBAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments