INDRA KUMAR GUPTA, MUMBAI v. ITO WD 12(1)(4), MUMBAI

ITA 204/MUM/2010 | 2006-2007
Pronouncement Date: 29-03-2011 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 20419914 RSA 2010
Assessee PAN AAAPG8611K
Bench Mumbai
Appeal Number ITA 204/MUM/2010
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 21 day(s)
Appellant INDRA KUMAR GUPTA, MUMBAI
Respondent ITO WD 12(1)(4), MUMBAI
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 29-03-2011
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted I
Tribunal Order Date 29-03-2011
Assessment Year 2006-2007
Appeal Filed On 08-01-2010
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI I BENCH BEFORE SHRI R.V.EASWAR (PRESIDENT) & SHRI T.R.SOOD ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A.NO.204/MUM/2010 A.Y 2006-07 INDRA KUMAR GUPTA (PROP.) INTER DYE INDUSTRIES 5 APPEJAY HOUSE 130 APOLLO ST. FORT MUMBAI 400 020 PAN: AAAPG 8611 K VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER 12(1)(4) MUMBAI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : MRS. UMA MAHADEVKAR. RESPONDENT BY : MR. S.K.SINGH. (SR. AR) O R D E R PER T.R.SOOD AM: IN THIS APPEAL VARIOUS GROUNDS HAVE BEEN RAISED TH ROUGH WHICH THE ONLY DISPUTE RAISED IS REGARDING DISALLOWANCE O F INTEREST. 2. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES WE FIND THAT DUR ING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ASSESSING OFFICER NOTICED THAT ASSESSEE HAD BORROWED CERTAIN AMOUNTS AND INTEREST WAS PAID IN THE RANGE OF 9% TO 12%. SIMILARLY ASSESSEE WAS CHARGING INTEREST IN THE RA NGE OF 9% TO 15% FROM THE MONEY ADVANCED BY THE ASSESSEE. NO INTERES T WAS CHARGED FROM SOME OF THE PARTIES. THEREFORE ASSESSING OFFI CER WORKED OUT THE DISALLOWANCE @ 11% OF INTEREST IN RESPECT OF THOSE PARTIES AND DISALLOWED A SUM OF ` `` ` .2 28 435/-. 3. ON APPEAL THE LD. CIT[A] FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL HELD THAT NO INTEREST WAS CHARGEABLE IN RESPECT OF LOAN TO M/S SNOWCOOL MENTHA PRODUCTIONS PVT. LTD. SIMILARLY SI NCE THE AMOUNT OF 2 ` `` ` .2 00 000/- WAS PAID TO SHRI OM PRAKASH GUPTA ON 31 -3-2005 NO INTEREST WAS HELD TO BE CHARGEABLE. IN RESPECT OF T HE OTHER PARTIES LD. CIT[A] OBSERVED AS UNDER: .HOWEVER THE AO IS DIRECTED TO RECOMPUTE THE INT EREST DISALLOWANCE IN RESPECT OF THE THREE REMAINING PART IES ON THE BASIS OF ACTUAL BALANCES OUTSTANDING FOR THE ACTUAL PERIOD F OR THEY REMAINED OUTSTANDING. 4. BEFORE US LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE FAIRLY S UBMITTED THAT ALL THE GRIEVANCES OF THE ASSESSEE HAVE ALREADY BEEN AD DRESSED BY THE LD. CIT[A] AND THEREFORE APPEAL MAY BE TREATED AS INF RUCTUOUS. 5. ON THE OTHER HAND LD. DR RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE CIT[A]. 6. AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT[A] DELETED THE INTEREST IN ONE CASE BY FOLLOWIN G THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. IN ANOTHER CASE INTEREST WAS HELD TO BE N OT CHARGEABLE BECAUSE LOAN WAS GIVEN ONLY ON THE LAST DATE OF THE FINANCIAL YEAR. IN THE CASE OF REMAINING PARTIES HE HAS DIRECTED THE AO TO CHARGE INTEREST FOR THE ACTUAL PERIOD. THIS CLEARLY SHOWS THAT GRIEVANCES OF THE ASSESSEE HAVE ALREADY BEEN ADDRESSED BY THE LD. CIT [A] AND THEREFORE APPEAL HAS BECOME INFRUCTUOUS. 7. IN THE RESULT APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISS ED AS INFRUCTUOUS. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS DAY OF 2 9 TH MARCH 2011. SD/- SD/- (R.V.EASWAR) (T.R.SOOD) PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI: 29/3/2011.