DCIT, CIRCLE - 10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. APSAHARA ESTATES LTD., KOLKATA

ITA 1589/KOL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 November 2018AY 2013-142 pages

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

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to allow depreciation as the assessee had not claimed it as expenditure. Regarding interest expenditure, the tribunal noted that the issue was still alive before the Assessing Officer for further verification and adjudication.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against an order allowing depreciation on a building and disallowing interest expenditure. The assessee did not appear before the tribunal. The Revenue's appeal was filed with a one-day delay, which was condoned.

What were the issues?

Whether depreciation on a building was allowable when not claimed as expenditure, and the allowability of interest expenditure where the assessee lent money at a higher rate than borrowed.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH “SMC” KOLKATA

Before: Shri S.S, Godara

This Revenue’s appeal for assessment year 2013-14, arises against the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-4, Kolkata’s order dated 27.04.2018 passed in case No. 195/CIT(A)-4/2016-17 involving proceedings u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short ‘the Act’. Case called twice. None appears at assessee’s behest. I thus proceed ex parte against assessee in the instant case.

The Revenue’s instant appeal suffers one day delay in filing. It is condoned as per Assessing Officer’s condonation petition stating reasons thereof. This Revenue’s appeal is accordingly taken up for adjudication on merits.

The Revenue’s former substantive ground seeks to reverse CIT(A)’s findings allowing depreciation of ₹1,58,956/- claimed on building. Learned Departmental Representative fails to rebut the CIT(A)’s clinching finding of the fact that assessee

ITA No.1589/Kol/2018 A.Y. 2013-14 DCIT, Cir-10(1), Kol. Vs. M/s Apsahara Estates Ltd. Page 2 had nowhere claimed such an amount as expenditure. I therefore decline the Revenue’s instant former substantive ground.

Next comes the latter issue of disallowance of interest expenditure of ₹1,19,67,007/-. The Revenue’s case is that the assessee had been lending money at higher rate of 13-14% as against borrowing rates of 12.75% from related parties etc., I find at page 6 para 5.3 of CIT(A)’s order under challenge that he has directed the Assessing Officer to verify the relevant chart submitted during the course of lower appellate proceedings prima facie indicating higher rate of interest charged than that paid on borrowings. I find no prejudice has been caused to the Revenue since the issue in question is very much alive before the Assessing Officer for consequential adjudication. The Revenue’s instant latter ground also fails in these facts and circumstances.

This Revenue’s appeal is dismissed. Order pronounced in open court on 14/11/2018 (S.S. Godara) Judicial Member Kolkata, *Dkp/Sr.PS "दनांकः- 14/11/2018 कोलकाता आदेश क" ""त"ल"प अ"े"षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. अपीलाथ"/Appellant-DCIT, Cir-10(1), p-7, Chowringhee Sq. 3rd Fl, Kolkata-69

""यथ"/Respondent-M/s Apsahara Estates Ltd., Block No.DB-80, Salt Lake Kol-64 3. संबं"धत आयकर आयु%त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु%त- अपील / CIT (A) 5. &वभागीय ")त)न"ध, आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण कोलकाता / DR, ITAT, Kolkata 6. गाड+ फाइल / Guard file. By order/आदेश से, // उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता ।

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →