IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCH: `C' NEW DELHI
BEFORE SHRI R. S. SYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
AND
SHRI C. M. GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER
I.T.A .No.-1608/Del/2013
(Assessment Year-2006-07)
DCIT (LTU) Vs. M/s Hero Motors Ltd.
NBBC Plaza, Pushp Vihar, Sector-III, 601, International Trade
New Delhi-17 Tower, Nehru Place
New Delhi-110014
PAN: AAACH8459F
(APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT)
Revenue by:-Sh. Satpal Singh, Sr. DR.
Assessee by:-Sh. Sumit Bansal, CA
ORDER
PER C. M. GARG, JM.
This appeal has been preferred by the Revenue against the order of the
CIT (Appeals)- X New Delhi dated 16/11/2012 in appeal No. 319/09-10 for the
Assessment Year 2006-07.
2. The sole ground raised by the Revenue in this appeal reads as under:
"1. On the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law,
the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in deleting the addition of
Rs.29,47,897/- made on account of disallowance of interest
expenditure being incurred for non business purpose."
2
3. Apropos aforementioned ground of the Revenue, the ld. Departmental
Representative (DR) submitted that the ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in deleting
the addition of Rs.29,47,897/- made by the AO on account of disallowance of
interest expenditure being incurred for non-business purpose. The ld. DR
supported the assessment order and submitted that the impugned order may be
set aside by restoring that of the AO.
4. Replying to the above the ld. counsel for the assessee supported copies of
the order of ITAT `C' Bench in assessee's own case ITA No.1847/Del/2012 for
AY 2007-08 dated 06.07.2012 and ITA No. 2919/Del/2012 & 2920/Del/2012
for AY 2005-06 and 2008-09 respectively vide dated 17.5.2013 and submitted
that the issue has been decided in favour of the assessee and against the
Revenue, by dismissing the above appeal of the Revenue in assessee's own case
for earlier and subsequent assessment years.
5. On careful consideration of above submissions. At the outset, we observe
that this case is pertaining to AY 2006-07 and from the orders of the Tribunal
for AY 2007-08 (Supra) and for AY 2005-06 and 2008-09 (Supra), we observed
that the issue has been decided in favour of the assessee and against the
Revenue. The relevant operative part of the order of the Tribunal for AY 2007-
08, which was followed by the Tribunal in the subsequent order vide dated
17.5.2013 (Supra). We observe that the Tribunal has upheld the finding of the
CIT(A) pointing out specific circumstances as to why no disallowance deserve
3
to be made in the case of assessee. The relevant operative para of the order of
the Tribunal vide dated 06.07.2012 (Supra) reads as under:
"6. With the assistance of Learned Departmental
Representative, we have gone through the record carefully.
On perusal of the findings of the Learned CIT(Appeals),
extracted Supra, we are convinced that no case is made out
for disallowance of interest expenses. Learned first
appellate authority has recorded the findings of fact
pointing out specific circumstance as to why no
disallowance deserves to be made in this case. According to
the Learned CIT(Appeals), there is no nexus between the
borrowings made by the assessee company and advance
given to M/s. Hero Global Designs Ltd. similarly, the
outstanding sums extracted supra, represents the sales
consideration of assets, technical know-how, rent etc. which
are not the advance given by the assessee out of the
borrowed funds. In such circumstances, no disallowance
can be made. Learned first appellate authority has
appreciated the controversy in right perspective and no
interference is called for in her order."
6. The ld. DR fairly accepted that the issue has been decided in favour of the
assessee and appeals of the Revenue have been dismissed for earlier and
subsequent assessment year.
7. In view of above, we are inclined to hold that the issue is squarely
covered in favour of the assessee by the above orders of the Tribunal. Hence,
4
the present appeal of the Revenue being devoid of merits, deserves to be
dismissed and be dismissed the same. Accordingly sole ground of the Revenue
as well as appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 01/12/2014.
Sd/- Sd/-
(R. S. SYAL) (C. M. GARG)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Dated: 01/12/2014
*AK VERMA*
Copy forwarded to:
1. Appellant
2. Respondent
3. CIT
4. CIT(Appeals)
5. DR: ITAT
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
|
