Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Jaipur
Goverdhan Pd. Singhal, Jaipur vs Department Of Income Tax on 5 September, 2014
1 ITA 415/JP/2010
ACIT VS. Goverdhan Pd. Singhal
IN THE INCOMETAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
JAIPUR BENCH: JAIPUR
(BEFORE SHRI R.P. TOLANI AND SHRI T.R. MEENA)
ITA No. 415/JP/2010
Asstt. Year : 2007-08.
PAN No. ACVPS 0236 P
The ACIT, Circle-6, vs. Shri Goverdhan Prasad Singhal,
Jaipur. Gole Market, Jawahar Nagar, Jaipur.
(Appellant) (Respondent)
Department by : Shri D.C. Sharma
Respondent by : Shri Shambhu Lal Gupta
Date of hearing : 01/09/2014
Date of pronouncement : 05/09/2014
ORDER
PER: T.R. MEENA, A.M. In this case, originally order was passed by this Bench on 20/5/2011. The department filed two additional grounds, but ground No. iv of the Revenue's appeal was not decided by this Bench. The Revenue filed M.A. against this order vide M.A. No. 58/JP/2011 for A.Y. 2007-08, which was decided by this Bench on 11/7/2014 and the Revenue's M.A. was allowed. The case was re-fixed for hearing and which was heard and learned AR for the assessee argued that the assessee already reduced interest income from derived profit for calculating deduction U/s 10A and 2 ITA 415/JP/2010 ACIT VS. Goverdhan Pd. Singhal 10B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act). He particularly drew our attention on page No. 33 of the paper book, which is P&L Account of Jaipur Unit. Net interest of Rs. 10,54,876 and commission of Rs. 2,50,000/- has been credited. He again drew our attention on page No. 25 of the paper book wherein deduction U/s 10B of the Act for Jaipur Unit had been calculated. The Auditor had reduced interest and commission at Rs. 13,04,676/- from the derived profit and gain from 100% export oriented undertaking, thus, he requested that the Revenue's appeal may please be dismissed. It is further argued that the learned Assessing Officer verified the nexus of interest, which had been accounted on net basis during the course of assessment proceedings. The appellant had made major investment out of over draft allowed by the bank on which interest earned. The interest paid on such over draft had been reduced from the interest received. The assessee had also excess fund, which has been also used by the assessee to advancing money on interest, which has direct nexus with the business as excess fund generated to the business only. The learned CIT(A) has also thoroughly examined this issue before allowing the net interest. The learned DR supported the order of the Assessing Officer.
2. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on the record. In audit report, the Auditor had reduced interest 3 ITA 415/JP/2010 ACIT VS. Goverdhan Pd. Singhal and commission income of Rs. 13,04,676/- from derived profit and gain. Further the learned CIT(A) had analyzed the interest received and interest paid during the year under consideration in his order and had given detailed findings on this issue. The assessee has taken interest and commission income in total at Rs. 13,04,672/- under head business and profession and included in the income of the year under consideration. Therefore, we do not find any reason to interfere in the order of the learned CIT(A).
3. In the result, the Revenue's appeal is dismissed on this ground.
Order pronounced in the open court on 05/09/2014.
Sd/- Sd/- (R.P. TOLANI) (T.R. MEENA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Jaipur, Dated : 05th September, 2014 * Ranjan Copy forwarded to :- 1. The ACIT, Circle-6, Jaipur.
2. Shri Goverdhan Prasad Singhal, Jaipur.
3. The CIT (A)
4. The CIT
5. The D.R Guard file (I.T.A. No. 415/JP/2010) By Order, AR ITAT Jaipur.