What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found it appropriate to remand the appeal back to the Assessing Officer. The assessee was directed to explain and co-relate the funds utilized for the overdraft facility.

The assessee claimed a deduction of Rs. 21,70,804/- for interest paid on an overdraft facility. The Assessing Officer disallowed this amount, and the First Appellate Authority confirmed the disallowance.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the allowability of interest paid on an overdraft facility when the assessee claimed the funds were used for acquiring interest-bearing assets.

Naresh Shivlal Bhasin vs DCIT | ITAT Mumbai 2018

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES, ‘B’ MUMBAI

Before: Shri JOGINDER SINGH, & Shri G. MANJUNATHA

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh B. Advani, Shri S.K. Mishra-DR

Hearing: 04/10/2018

आदेश / O R D E R Per Joginder Singh (Judicial Member) The assessee is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 13/06/2016 of the Ld. First Appellate Authority, Mumbai, in confirming the disallowance made by the ld. Assessing Officer pertaining to interest paid to the bank amounting to Rs.21,70,804/- towards overdraft facility obtained by the assessee.

During hearing, the ld. counsel for the assessee, Shri Mukesh Advani, claimed that the assessee in a position to co-relate the funds, if a reasonable opportunity is granted to the assessee. It was explained that most of the funds were utilized for acquiring interest bearing asset. Our attention was invited to page-2(para-2) of the assessment order. On the other hand, Shri S. K. Mishra, Ld. DR, defended the addition made by the Ld. Assessing Officer by further submitting that if the claim of the assessee is accepted, it needs re-verification at the level of the Ld. Assessing Officer.

2.1. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The facts, in brief, are that the assessee declared total income of Rs.82,65,820/-

Mr. Naresh Shivlal Bhasin in his return on 23/09/2011. The assessee claimed various receipt of interest from various investment and out of the gross receipt of Rs.73,76,609/-, the assessee claimed deduction of Rs.21,70,804/-, being the interest paid on overdraft facility taken from the bank. Considering the totality of facts and the explanation of the assessee, we deem it appropriate to remand this appeal to the file of the ld. Assessing Officer to explain its claim and to co-relate the funds. The ld. Assessing Officer is directed to verify the claim of the assessee and decide in accordance with law. The assessee be given opportunity of being heard. The appeal of the assessee is allowed of statistical purposes only.

Finally, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

This order was pronounced in the open court in the presence of the ld. representatives from both sides at the conclusion of the hearing on 18/09/2018.

NARESH SHIVLAL BHASIN,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 20(2), MUMBAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments