AWAS DEVELOPERS & CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENT. CIR. 5(4), MUMBAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found contradictory findings on whether the interest was debited to the profit and loss account or solely capitalized. Therefore, the issue was remanded to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication after factual verification.
What were the facts?
The assessee, a real estate developer, debited interest expenses to its profit and loss account and capitalized it to work in progress. The Assessing Officer disallowed this interest expense under Section 43B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as it was not paid by the due date of filing the return.
What were the issues?
Whether interest expenses capitalized to work in progress are disallowable under Section 43B if not paid by the due date of filing the return.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A”, BENCH
Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM & SHRI M.BALAGANESH, AM
आदेश / O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH (A.M): This appeal in A.Y.2015-16 arises out of the order by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-53, Mumbai in appeal No.CIT(A)-53/IT-418/DCC-5(4)/2017-18 dated 16/05/2018 (ld. CIT(A) in short) against the order of assessment passed u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as Act) dated 07/12/2017 by the ld. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 5(4), Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as ld. AO).
M/s. Awas Developers & Construction P. Ltd.
The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:-
The Learned CIT (A) has erred in law & on facts in upholding the Learned AO's action of disallowing interest expenses to the tune of Rs.8,86,16,625/- u/s 43B of the IT Act, 1961 & reducing the same from Work in progress as on 31/03/2015 , which is bad in law.
2. The Appellant craves leave to add to and/ or amend and/ or delete and/ or modify and/ or alter the aforesaid grounds of appeal
as and when the occasion demands.
3. All the aforesaid grounds of appeal are independent, in the alternative and without prejudice to one another.
3. None appeared on behalf of the assessee. We have heard the ld. DR and perused the materials available on record. We find that assessee is a real estate developer and had filed its return for the A.Y.2015-16 on 29/09/2015 declaring total loss of Rs.93,240/-. The ld. AO during the course of assessment proceedings observed that assessee has not paid the outstanding interest payment of Rs.8,86,16,625/- to Punjab and Maharashtra Co-operative Bank on or before the due date of filing of return of income. Accordingly, the interest expenses of Rs.8,86,16,625/- debited to profit and loss account and its capitalisation to work in progress(WIP) was disallowed by the ld. AO u/s.43B of the Act in the assessment. We find that the assessee before the ld. CIT(A) had contended that provisions of Section 43B of the Act would apply only if interest was claimed as deduction while computing the income referred to Section 28 of the Act. It was further contended before the ld. CIT(A) that no expenditure was claimed in the profit and loss account but rather the same was capitalised to work in progress as on 31/03/2015. Accordingly, it was argued that provisions of Section 43B of the Act would not come into operation at all. We find that the ld. CIT(A) ignoring the aforesaid contentions of the assessee had observed in part 4.3 of the order that assessee had debited the sum of Rs.8,86,16,625/- in its profit and loss
M/s. Awas Developers & Construction P. Ltd. account towards finance cost and had also observed that the said interest expenditure had been capitalised and debited to work in progress. We find this matter requires factual verification by the ld. AO as there are contradictory findings on facts. Hence, we deem it fit and appropriate to remand this issue to the file of the ld. AO for de novo adjudication in accordance with law. Assessee is at liberty to furnish further evidences in support of its contentions. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on this 15/01/2020
More judgments on Section 43B
- Vco Consulatatns and Sevices Private… vs ITO, Corporate Ward 3(3), ChennaiITA 2145/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Siemens Gamesa Renewable Power Private… vs The Dy CIT Circle 8(2)(1), MumbaiITA 8020/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Amritvarsha Industries Limited, Ambedkar… vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 6481/DEL/2026[2010-2011]Status: Disposed7 Oct 2026AY 2010-2011
- Karaj Singh, Haryana vs PCIT (Central) Gurgaon, GurgaonITA 642/CHANDI/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed1 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
- ACIT, Mumbai vs Imp Powers Limited, MumbaiITA 4982/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2012-13
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Asian Aura vs. Government Of Nct Of Delhi And Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Shining Steel Through Its Proprietor Kartik Gupta vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Redamancy World Through Its Proprietor Sanjay Kumar Goel vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Arj Exim INDIA vs. Additional Commissioner Of CGST, Appeals-Ii, New Delhi And OrsDelhi · 27 Oct 2026
- The State Of Bihar Through The Commissioner Of State Tax vs. Kaushlendra KumarPatna · 27 Oct 2026