SURESH BHAGWANDAS AHUJA,SANGLI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 2, SANGLI
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that since the assessee had sufficient interest-free funds available, which were more than the advances given for non-business purposes, no disallowance of interest expenditure was warranted. The Tribunal also noted that the assessee's submission regarding interest-free funds was not dealt with by the lower authorities.
What were the facts?
The assessee, engaged in wholesale saree business, filed an income tax return. The Assessing Officer made additions including disallowance of interest expenses. The CIT(A) confirmed the disallowance of interest but deleted the addition on account of agricultural expenses.
What were the issues?
Whether disallowance of interest expenditure is justified when interest-free funds available are more than the advances made for non-business purposes. Whether the assessee is bound by an agreement for addition when it contradicts settled legal principles.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(3)Show listHide 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.
- CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd.2,118 citing313 ITR 340 · 2009 · HC
- CIT v. Reliance Industries Ltd.501 citing102 Taxmann.com 52 · 2019 · SC
- CIT v. Gujarat Reclaim & Rubber Products Ltd.42 citing383 ITR 236 · 2016 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, PUNE
Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM & SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM
ORDER
PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM:
This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 1, Kolhapur (‘CIT(A)’ for short) dated 04.12.2017 for the assessment year 2013-14.
Briefly, the facts of the case are as under :- The appellant is an individual running a wholesale business in Sarees in the name of his proprietary concern, M/s. Vijay Textiles. The assessee filed E-return for the assessment year 2013-14 on 19.09.2013 declaring total income of Rs.69,58,120/-. Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Sangli (‘the Assessing Officer’) vide order dated 22.03.2016 passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) at a total income of Rs.77,78,610/- after making the following additions :- (i) Addition u/s 37(1) of the I.T. Act Rs.5,39,080/- (ii) Addition u/s 50C of the I.T. Act Rs.45,000/- (iii) Addition on account of Agril. expenses Rs.79,335/- (iv) Addition on account of Depreciation Rs.66,583/- (v) Disallowance u/s 37(1) of the I.T. Act 90,492/-
Being aggrieved by the above additions, an appeal was preferred before the ld. CIT(A) contesting the addition of disallowance of interest of Rs.5,39,080/- and addition on account of agricultural income. The ld. CIT(A) had confirmed the disallowance of interest following his order in earlier assessment years without dealing with the submission of the appellant that no disallowance of interest is warranted, inasmuch as, interest free funds available were more than the advances given for non-business purposes since the interest free funds were utilized for the purpose of making the advances. The ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition on account of disallowance of agricultural expenses.
Being aggrieved by the order the ld. CIT(A) in confirming the disallowance of interest, the appellant is before us in the present appeal. 5. It is contended before us that the submission of the appellant that interest free funds were utilized for the purpose of making interest free advances had not been dealt with by either the Assessing Officer or the ld. CIT(A). He also drawn our attention to the financial statements filed in the Paper Book at page no.3 to demonstrate that the interest free funds are available at Rs.1,71,21,752/- as against the advance made of Rs.55,60,000/-. He further submitted that mere fact that the assessee had agreed for disallowance of interest in respect of the parties no.3 to 8 cannot be form the basis for making addition as there can be no estoppels against the settled position of law.
On the other hand, ld. Sr. DR placed reliance on the order of the ld. CIT(A).
We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The only issue in the present appeal relates to the disallowance of interest on the ground that the interest bearing funds have diverted for the purpose of making the advances on which no interest is earned. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee made the following interest free advances to the following parties :- Sr. Names Loan Interest No. Amount Amount 1 Bharatkumat B Ahuja 700000 105000 2 A V Hero 50000 7500 3 M B Dhere 10000 497 4 Girish Enterprises 200000 30000 5 Laxmi Sarees 1000000 2466 6 Kishor Warik 100000 8137 7 Girish Bachani 1500000 184932 8 Dhananjay Gadadwar 2000000 200548 Total 539080 8. It is contended before us that the above advances were made out of own funds not out of the borrowed funds. Therefore, there is no warrant to disallow any part of the interest expenditure claim. However, the appellant expressed no objection for disallowance of interest in respect of parties at sl. no. 3 to 8. Even the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition. From perusal of the orders of the lower authorities, it is evident that the appellant made a categorical statement that no interest bearing funds were utilized for the purpose of making the abovementioned advances. This submission had not been dealt with by the lower authorities. On perusal of the Balance Sheet placed at page no.3 of the Paper Book, it is evident that the interest free bearing funds were available to the extent of Rs.1,71,21,752/- as against the
More judgments on Section 37(1)
- Gillette India Limited, Mumbai vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, JaipurITA 1316/JPR/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Smit Navnitlal Soni, Ahmedabad, Gujarat vs ITO Ward-5(3)(1), Ahmedabad, GujaratITA 1434/AHD/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Shobha Sudamrao Tagad, Ahmednagar vs ITO WD-1, AhmednagarITA 311/PUN/2026[2023-24]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026AY 2023-24
- Digjam Limited, Jamnagar vs The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 349/RJT/2025[2021-22]Status: Disposed12 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Rajesh Maru, Mhow vs ITO-5(1), IndoreITA 839/IND/2025[2023-2024]Status: Disposed12 Oct 2026AY 2023-2024
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026
- M/S Barnala Steel Industries Private Limited vs. State Of Uttar Pradesh And 2 OthersAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- Skd Suppliers Private Limited vs. The Superintendent, Central CGST, Rishra Division, Range-Ii, And AnrCalcutta · 22 Oct 2026
- M/S Aasha Industries vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- M/S Bharat Iron Scrap vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026