Latest Expert Exchange Queries
sitemapHome | Registration | Job Portal for CA's | Expert Exchange | Currency Converter | Post Matrimonial Ads | Post Property Ads
News shortcuts: From the Courts | News Headlines | VAT (Value Added Tax) | Service Tax | Sales Tax | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | ICAI | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Indirect Tax | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing
Popular Search: Central Excise rule to resale the machines to a new company :: VAT Audit :: cpt :: due date for vat payment :: TDS :: list of goods taxed at 4% :: ACCOUNTING STANDARD :: ICAI offer Get Windows 7,Office 2010 in Rs.799 Taxes :: empanelment :: TAX RATES - GOODS TAXABLE @ 4% :: form 3cd :: articles on VAT and GST in India :: ARTICLES ON INPUT TAX CREDIT IN VAT :: VAT RATES :: ACCOUNTING STANDARDS
From the Courts »
 Group M. Media India Pvt. Ltd vs. UOI (Bombay High Court)
 Shreemati Devi vs. CIT (Allahabad High Court)
 Vatsala Shenoy vs. JCIT (Supreme Court)
  Dr. Gautam Sen vs. CCIT (Bombay High Court)
 Dr. Gautam Sen vs. CCIT (Bombay High Court)
 DCIT vs. Shivshankar R. Sharma (ITAT Mumbai)
 ACIT vs. Jawaharlal Agicha (ITAT Mumbai)
 CIT vs. M/s. D. Chetan & Co (Bombay High Court)
 Makes further amendments to Notification no. 157/90-Customs dated 28th March, 1990 regarding temporary admission under the ATA Carnet
 Appointment of Common Adjudicating Authority by DGRI - 2/2016-Customs

Ganjam Trading Co.Pvt.Ltd.New Prakash Cinema Bldg, N M Joshi Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400011 Vs. Income Tax Officer, 6(3)1),Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400020
October, 10th 2014
                    ,                  ""          

   .. ,                                         ,                

                    ./I.T.A. No.5368/Mum/2011
                   (   / Assessment Year :2004-05)

 Ganjam Trading Co.Pvt.Ltd.         /         Income Tax Officer, 6(3)1),
 New Prakash Cinema Bldg,           Vs.       Aayakar Bhavan,
 N M Joshi Marg,                              M.K.Road,
 Lower Parel,                                 Mumbai-400020

        ( /Appellant)                ..       (    / Respondent)
             . /   . / PAN/G IRNo.:AAACG3975H

              / Appellant by              :   Shri Firoze Andhyarujina and
                                              Shri B S Sharma
                /Respondent by :              Shri Durga Dutt

                / Date of Hearing
                                                  : 15.7.2014
               /Date of Pronouncement : 12.9.2014.

                                 / O R D E R
Per B.R.BASKARAN, Accountant Member:

      The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 04-

02-2011 passed by Ld CIT(A)-VI, Mumbai and it relates to the assessment year


2.    At the time of hearing, the Ld A.R submitted that the Ground No.1 relating

to Speculation loss was decided against the assessee by the Tribunal in its order

dated 20-07-2012 passed for AYs 2001-02 to 2003-04 respectively in ITA No.

3724/Mum/2005, 932/Mum/2006 and 1382/Mum/2007. The Ld A.R also

furnished a copy of the order passed by the Tribunal. We notice that the issue
                                                                I.T.A. No.5368/Mum/2011

urged in Ground No.1 relates to the view taken by the assessing officer to treat

the following items as falling under the category of "Speculation loss":-

       Fall in the market value of shares              64,025
       Profit on sale of shares                        58,405
       Notional interest                          3,00,59,387
         (restricted to Rs.1,51,79,050/-)

The Ld D.R also accepted the factual aspect submitted by Ld A.R.               Hence,

consistent with the view taken by the co-ordinate bench of Tribunal in the

assessee's own case relating to earlier years (referred supra), we confirm the

order of Ld CIT(A) on this issue and accordingly this issue is decided against the


3.     The Ground No.2 relates to the disallowance of proportionate interest of

Rs.3,24,09,653/- u/s 36(1)(iii) of the Act.     The Ground No.3 relates to the

disallowance made u/s 14A of the Act. Both the parties agreed that identical

issues were considered by the co-ordinate bench in its order, referred supra, and

both the issues were set aside to the file of the AO for considering them afresh.

Accordingly, both the parties agreed that these issues may be set aside to the

file of the AO in this year also. Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by Ld

CIT(A) on the above said two issues and restore them to the file of the AO for

considering them afresh in the light of discussions made by the co-ordinate

bench of Tribunal in the earlier years.

4.    The Ground No.4 relates to the disallowance of interest claim of Rs.1.74

crores under sec. 43B of the Act r.w. Explanation 3C thereto. The facts relating

to the same are discussed in brief. The assessee had borrowed funds from time

to time from M/s Essel Propack Ltd (formerly known as Essel Packaging Ltd) and
                                                            I.T.A. No.5368/Mum/2011

such borrowals stood at Rs.9,18,74,719/- as on 1.4.1997.    It appears that M/s

Essel propack Ltd had availed "Sales tax Deferral Scheme" announced by the

Government of Maharashtra. According to the above said scheme, the sales tax

collected by the business entities during a particular period can be retained by

them and the amount so retained shall be paid to the account of Government in

annual installments subsequent to the expiry of prescribed cooling period.

Under the above said Scheme framed by the Government of Maharashtra, M/s

Essel Propack Ltd was required to pay a sum of Rs.24,37,23,930/- in yearly

installments beginning from 2003 to 2010.     It appears that an entity named

SICOM was designated by Govt. of Maharashtra as the nodal agency for

collecting the above said installments.

5.   It appears that the assessee herein and M/s Essel Propack Ltd entered into

an agreement, as per which the assessee undertook to pay the Sales tax liability

of M/s Essel Propack Ltd which would become payable from 2003 to 2010. The

"Present value" of Rs.24,37,23,930/-, i.e., the aggregate amount payable from

2003 to 2010, was determined at Rs.5.62 crores. We had already noticed that

the assessee herein had borrowed funds from M/s Essesl Propack Ltd and the

outstanding amount of loan as on 1.4.1997 was Rs.9,18,74,719/-. In view of the

agreement cited above, the assessee herein transferred a sum of Rs.5.62 crores,

out of the above said amount of Rs.9.18 crores, to a separate Loan account.

The assessee considered the above said amount of Rs.5.62 crores as the amount

payable to SICOM (Govt. of Maharashtra).        The assessee has provided for

interest payable on the above said loan account and claimed the said interest

amount as deduction as "Interest payable to SICOM".
                                                              I.T.A. No.5368/Mum/2011

6.     Under the concept of Net Present Value, the present value of a future

amount is arrived at. For example, Rs.100/- deposited today in a fixed deposit

scheme carrying simple interest rate of 10%, would have a maturity value of

Rs.110/- after expiry of one year and Rs.120/- after the expiry of two years.

Hence the Net present Value of Rs.110/- (after one year) or Rs.120/- (after two

years) as on today would be Rs.100/-. The above example clarifies that the

"Present value" is akin to Principal amount and upon adding interest element

every year, the maturity amount would be equal to the amount payable in

future. In the instant case also, the assessee has to provide for interest on the

Net Present value of Rs.5.62 crores every year and then only it will accumulate

to the required level so that the assessee would be in a position to repay the

Sales tax liability of M/s Essel Propack Ltd from 2003 to 2010. The payment of

the S.T liability of M/s Essel propack is akin to repayment of loan taken from it.

The assessee would be in a position to demonstrate the same by furnishing

necessary working papers.

7.     Since the assessee has shown the interest claim as "Interest payable to

SICOM", the AO took the view that it would be hit by the provisions of sec.

43B(d) of the Act. Since the interest was not paid during the year, he disallowed

the interest claimed by the assessee by invoking the provisions of sec. 43B(d) of

the Act.   Since the AO had disallowed the entire interest claimed by the

assessee, the AO did not make any separate disallowance with the rider that the

same would stand, if the disallowance of entire interest is allowed by any

appellate authority.
                                                              I.T.A. No.5368/Mum/2011

8.     It appears that there is some confusion in the mind of assessee also.

Before us, the Ld A.R was inviting out attention to Sales tax deferral Scheme and

the circular issued by CBDT with regard to the same. Alternatively, the Ld A.R

also submitted that the provisions of sec. 43B(d) would apply to the interest

payable on loan taken from any public financial institution or a state financial

corporation or a state industrial investment corporation. He submitted that the

sales tax deferral scheme cannot be equated to the loan referred to in sec.

43B(d) of the Act.

9.        However, we may caution here that we have made the foregoing

discussions on the basis of submissions made before the tax authorities and also

before us. However, actual nature of agreement has not been examined by the

tax authorities. Hence, in our view, the arrangement between the assessee and

M/s Essel Prepack Ltd needs to be examined to find out as to whether the

observations made above are correct or not. Subject to such verification, in our

view, the arrangement made between the assessee and M/s Essel Propack Ltd

should be taken as pure finance arrangement.       The method of repayment is

purely a methodology agreed between them to settle the loan taken by the

assessee from M/s Essel Propack Ltd.        Though the assessee has shown the

amount of Rs.5.62 crores and interest thereon as payable to SICOM (Govt of

Maharashtra), in effect, it is a loan taken by the assessee from M/s Essel Propack

Ltd.   The assessee would repaying the amount directly to SICOM (Govt of

Maharashtra) on behalf of M/s Essel Propack Ltd. Hence, in our view, it would

not be correct to presume that it was a loan taken from SICOM (Govt. of

Maharashtra) or it was falling under Sales tax deferral Scheme.
                                                               I.T.A. No.5368/Mum/2011

10.   Hence, in our view, the assessing officer is also required to verify as to

whether the rate of interest adopted by the assessee to work out the interest

claim is reasonable or not, if he is satisfied on verification of the arrangement

that it was pure finance transaction. He may also verify that the interest liability

accumulated every year along with the principal amount of Rs.5.62 crores would

be sufficient to repay the sales tax liability of M/s Essel Propack Ltd beginning

from the year 2003 to 2010 and such verification would help to ascertain the rate

of interest agreed between the parties and its reasonableness.

11.   Subject to the verification of the agreement and the interest workings

referred above, we are of the view that the interest liability claimed by the

assessee cannot be disallowed u/s 43B of the Act, if it is considered as pure

finance arrangement.      Accordingly, we set aside the order of Ld CIT(A) and

restore this matter to his file with the direction to examine the agreement and

also the reasonableness of the interest rate in the light of discussions made

supra and take appropriate decision in accordance with the law.

12. Ground No.5 relates to disallowance of interest paid u/s 201(1A) of the Act.

The assessee claimed interest amount of Rs.8,76,221/- paid by it u/s 201(1A) of

the Act for the delay in payment of Tax deducted at source.          The assessee

claimed the same as deduction on the plea that it was compensatory in nature

and is akin to Sales tax etc. The AO did not accept the said explanation and

hence disallowed the same. The Ld CIT(A) also confirmed the said disallowance.

13.    Before us, the Ld A.R placed reliance on the decision rendered by Hon'ble

Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Chennai Properties & Investment Ltd

(1999)(105 Taxman 346) to contend that the interest paid by the assessee u/s

201(1A) of the Act is allowable as deduction. However, a careful perusal of the
                                                              I.T.A. No.5368/Mum/2011

said decision would show that the Hon'ble Madras High Court has, in clear words,

held that the interest paid u/s 201(1A) could not be allowed as business

deduction. The said decision has been rendered by the Hon'ble High Court by

placing reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat

Commerce & Industries Ltd Vs. CIT (1998)(230 ITR 733). Hence, we do not find

merit in the contentions of the assessee on this issue. Accordingly, we confirm

the order passed by Ld CIT(A) on this issue.

14.    In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as partly allowed

for statistical purposes.

       The above order was pronounced in the open court on 12th Sept, 2014.

            12th Sept , 2014    

        Sd                                             sd

(  /SANJAY GARG)                               (..  / B.R. BASKARAN)
     / JUDICIAL MEMBER                            / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

  Mumbai: 12 Sept ,2014.

. ../ SRL , Sr. PS

        /Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1.  / The Appellant
2.  / The Respondent.
3.      () / The CIT(A)- concerned
4.       / CIT concerned
5.       ,     ,                   /
      DR, ITAT, Mumbai concerned
6.      / Guard file.

                                                              / BY ORDER,
              True copy
                                                      (Asstt. Registrar)
                                        ,  /ITAT, Mumbai
Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2016 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Organic SEO Outsourcing Organic Search Engine Optimization Outsourcing Organic Website SEO Organic SEO India Website SEO India Organic Search Engine Optimization India Organic Internet SEO India Organic Web

Transfer Pricing | International Taxation | Business Consulting | Corporate Compliance and Consulting | Assurance and Risk Advisory | Indirect Taxes | Direct Taxes | Transaction Advisory | Regular Compliance and Reporting | Tax Assessments | International Taxation Advisory | Capital Structuring | Withholding tax advisory | Expatriate Tax Reporting | Litigation | Badges | Club Badges | Seals | Military Insignias | Emblems | Family Crest | Software Development India | Software Development Company | SEO Company | Web Application Development | MLM Software | MLM Solutions