Gujarat High Court
Commissioner Of Income Tax I vs Enviro Control Associated Pvt ... on 17 February, 2014
Bench: Akil Kureshi, Sonia Gokani
O/TAXAP/1016/2013 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
TAX APPEAL No. 1016 of 2013
With
CROSS OBJECTION No. 2 of 2014
In
TAX APPEAL No. 1016 of 2013
================================================================
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX I....Appellant(s)
Versus
ENVIRO CONTROL ASSOCIATED PVT LTD....Opponent(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
Mr SUDHIR M MEHTA, ADVOCATE for the Appellant(s) No. 1
Mr B S SOPARKAR, ADVOCATE for the Opponent(s) No. 1
================================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
and
HONOURABLE Ms. JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI
17th February 2014
COMMON ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI)
Leave to correct the amount mentioned in Question {A} in the Tax Appeal preferred by the Revenue.
Tax Appeal is admitted for consideration of the following substantial questions of law : {A} "Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and as per law, the ITAT is right in deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer of Rs. 2,29,61,861/= made under section 80IA (4) of the I.T Act ?"
Page 1 of 3
O/TAXAP/1016/2013 ORDER
{C} "Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case
and as per law, the Hon'ble ITAT is right in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 12,50,000/= made by the A.O of sale promotion expenses claimed ?"
Assessee has preferred CrossObjection No. 2 of 2014 in which, the following question is admitted : "Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has erred in law and on facts in confirming the order passed by the CIT [A] in disallowing the claim of Mission Research Project Expenditure of Rs. 2,83,185/= under Section 37 (1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for A.Y 200708 ?"
We notice that the Revenue has raised an additional Question {B}, which reads as under : {B} Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and as per law, the Hon'ble ITAT is right in deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer of Rs. 33,84,000/= made u/s. 36[1](iii) of the I.T Act ?"
Question {B} pertains to disallowance of interest expenditure of Rs. 33.84 lakhs made by the Assessing Officer on the ground that the interest free loans were advanced to the Directors of the company. The Tribunal, however, noted that the assessee had share capital of Rs. 8.30 Crores and reserves & surpluses of Rs. 4.32 Crores [rounded off]. The Tribunal, therefore, concluded Page 2 of 3 O/TAXAP/1016/2013 ORDER that the interestfree advances were made from interestfree funds available. That being the position, such question is not required to be considered.
{Akil Kureshi, J.} {Ms. Sonia Gokani, J.} Prakash* Page 3 of 3