UB AJANTA BREWERIES PVT.LTD,AURANGABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 2, AURANGABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2952/PUN/2017Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 January 2022AY 2011-125 pages

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

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee possessed sufficient interest-free funds (shareholders' funds) which far exceeded the advance given to the sister concern. Following established precedents, the disallowance of interest was ordered to be deleted.

What were the facts?

The assessee company advanced Rs. 1.30 crore to a related concern, UB Nizam Breweries Pvt. Ltd., during the assessment year 2011-12. The Assessing Officer disallowed Rs. 1,03,03,190/- of interest on borrowed funds, treating the advance as for non-business purposes.

What were the issues?

Whether interest on borrowed funds can be disallowed when the assessee has sufficient interest-free funds to cover advances made to related concerns?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 36(1)(iii)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(4)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 “A”, PUNE – VIRTUAL COURT

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

For Appellant: Shri Nitin S. Bangad
For Respondent: Shri S.P. Walimbe

आदेश / ORDER

PER R.S.SYAL, VP : This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the CIT(A) on 20-09-2017 confirming the disallowance of Rs.1,03,03,190/- made by the Assessing Officer (AO) u/s.36(1)(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) in relation to the assessment year 2011-12. 2. Succinctly, the facts of the case are that the assessee is a company engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of beers. In the proceedings u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act, the AO noticed that the assessee made advance of Rs.1.30 crore to M/s. UB Nizam

1.

UB Ajanta Breweries Pvt. Ltd., Breweries Pvt. Ltd. (UBPL) during the year with the closing balance standing at Rs.8.85 crore. The assesse had also paid interest amounting to Rs.5.21 crore on borrowed funds. Treating the amount paid to UBPL, a related concern, for non-business purposes, the AO made disallowance of interest u/s.36(1)(iii) of the Act at Rs.1,03,03,190/. The assessee remained unsuccessful before the ld. CIT(A), against which an appeal has been preferred before the Tribunal.

3.

We have heard the rival submissions through Virtual Court and perused the relevant material on record. The AO has not accepted the assessee’s contention of having advanced money to UBPL, its sister concern, for business purposes. In fact, the assessee failed to substantiate the advancement of such money to its sister concern for any business purposes. However, it is seen that the assessee’s share capital with Reserves and Surplus as at the end of the year stands at Rs.96.55 crore with the opening balance at Rs.96.88 crore. As against that, the amount of advance given to sister concern during the year is Rs.1.30 crore with closing balance at Rs.8.55 crore. Thus, it is manifest that the assessee’s shareholders’ fund is much more than the amount of advance given to sister concern.

UB Ajanta Breweries Pvt. Ltd.,

4.

The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. (2009) 313 ITR 340 (Bom), has held that where an assessee possessed sufficient interest free funds of its own which were generated in the course of relevant financial year, apart from substantial shareholders’ funds, presumption gets established that the investments in sister concerns were made by the assessee out of interest free funds and, therefore, no part of interest on borrowings can be disallowed on the basis that the investments were made out of interest bearing funds. In reaching this conclusion, the Hon’ble High Court relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of East India Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. CIT (1997) 224 ITR 627 (SC). Similar view has been taken by the Hon'ble Dehi High Court in CIT vs. Tin Box Company (2003) 260 ITR 637 (Del), holding that when the capital and interest free unsecured loan with the assessee far exceeded the interest free loan advanced to the sister concern, disallowance of part of interest out of total interest paid by the assessee to the bank was not justified.

More recently, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT(LTU) VS. Reliance Industries Ltd. (2019) 410 ITR 466 (SC) has reiterated the same view.

UB Ajanta Breweries Pvt. Ltd.,

5.

When we examine the amount of Investments at Rs.8.55 crore as against the availability of Share Capital and Reserves at Rs.96.55 crore, it becomes evident that the amount of such Investments is much less than the amount of shareholders’ fund.

Respectfully following the precedent, we order to delete the disallowance of interest amounting to Rs.1,03,03,190/-.

6.

In the result, the appeal is allowed.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 18th January, 2022.

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 →