BALEX PVT.LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE ACIT.,CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, BARODA

00 Your appellant submits that each assessment year is separate from the other and the additions / disallowances made need to be adjudicated for that assessment year based on the relevant facts and circumstances attached to each such addition / disallowance and without prejudice to what has been decided for earlier or subsequent assessment year.”

At the outset, the ld.counsel for the assessee submitted that the solitary issue in the present appeal relates to disallowance of interest expenses amounting to Rs.1,43,127/- allegedly paid on unsecured loan taken by the assessee. It was pointed out from the assessment order that this interest was claimed to have been paid by the assessee on a loan taken from one M/s.Shanti Metals Pvt.Ltd. amounting to Rs.33,35,000/-. The loan was taken in the immediately preceding assessment year; i.e. AY 2005-

The order of the Assessing Officer reveals that the impugned loan was treated as unexplained credit and added to the income of the assessee in AY 2005-06 and for this reason, the interest claimed thereon was disallowed. The Assessing Officer in his order noted that the disallowance of the addition of unsecured loan in AY 2005-06 had been confirmed by the Ld.CIT(A), but the ITAT has restored back the issue to the Assessing Officer for reconsideration. That in the second round before the Assessing Officer in AY 2005-06, the addition of the unsecured loan treating it as unexplained credit, had been reiterated by the Assessing Officer. Asst.Year 2006-07

Now before us, the ld.counsel for the assessee contended that the addition made by the Assessing Officer of the unsecured loans in AY 2005- 06 had again travelled upto the ITAT, who had again restored the issue back to the Assessing Officer for reconsideration afresh in the appeal of the assessee in ITA No.28/Ahd/2022 vide order dated 06/05/2022 (copy of the order was placed before us). His contention therefore before us was that since the determination of the nature of the unsecured loan was still in flux and pending before the Assessing Officer, therefore, the issue of disallowance of claim of the interest charged thereon cannot be decided at this stage and he therefore prayed that the same be also restored to the Assessing Officer to be decided along with determination of the nature of unsecured loan on which was charged by the Assessing Officer for the AY 2005-06. 5. The Ld.DR fairly agreed with the same.

In view of the same, this appeal is restored back to the Assessing Officer for reconsideration and is directed to be decided along with/ after taking into consideration the appeal of the assessee for AY 2005-06 since the issue in this year is directly related that in AY 2005-06, wherein nature of the loan is to be determined whether a genuine unsecured loan or unexplained cash credit and only thereafter the claim of interest charged thereon can be adjudicated. Asst.Year 2006-07

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

""यथ" / The Respondent. 3. संबं"धत आयकर आयु"त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु"त ( अपील ) / The CIT(A)- (NFAC)

"वभागीय ""त"न"ध , आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण , राजोकट/DR,ITAT, Ahmedabad, 6. गाड" फाईल /Guard file.