Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai
Sanika Shilotri, Mumbai vs Assessee on 14 February, 2007
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
"E" BENCH: MUMBAI
BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
AND SHRI R.S. PADVEKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER
ITA No.346/Mum/2009
(Assessment Year: 2003-04)
Mrs. Sanika Shilotri,
102, Varun, J.P. Road,
Versova, Andheri (W),
Mumbai -400 061 ........ Assessee
Vs
ACIT Ward 20(3),
Room no.506, 5th Floor,
Piramal Chambers, Parel,
Mumbai -400 012 ........ Revenue
PAN: AMNPS 1767 K
Assessee by: Shri Jayant R. Bhatt
Revenue by: Shri D. Songate
ORDER
PER R.S. PADVEKAR, JM
The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the impugned order of the Ld. CIT (A) Central -II, Mumbai dated 14.02.2007 for the A.Y. 2003-04. There is delay of 336 days in filing the appeal. The assessee has filed an application for condoning the delay. The assessee has also filed an affidavit in support of the application for delay condonation.
2. We have heard the parties on the issue of delay in filing appeal. The Ld. Counsel submits that the assessee has relied on the decision of the Madras High Court in the case of Trishul Investments Ltd. 305 ITR 434, but the same was not considered by the Ld. CIT (A) and now 2 ITA 346/M/2009 Mrs. Sanika Shilotri the said decision has been upheld by the apex court which is in favour of the assessee as SLP filed by the Revenue has been dismissed. The assessee came to know about the said decision quite late and hence, there is a delay in filing the appeal. In our opinion, considering the facts of the case, in the advancement of the justice, the delay needs to be condoned and we accordingly condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing.
3. The only solitary issue for our consideration is whether the assessee is entitled for deduction of the interest of ` 2,96,716/- while computing the short-term-capital-gain.
4. We have heard the parties. The assessee has shown short-term- capital-gain of ` 4,84,172/- and claimed certain expenditure also in respect of the interest paid to Standard Chartered Bank on the loan borrowed. The A.O. disallowed the interest expenditure. There is no dispute about the fact that the assessee has borrowed the loan for the investment in the shares. In the case of Trishul Investments Ltd. (supra) it is held that interest paid on the money borrowed which is used for the acquisition of the shares is to be treated as cost of acquisition of the shares and same is to be allowed while working out the capital gains. In our opinion, the issue stands squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision in the case of Trishul Investments Ltd. (supra). We, accordingly, allow the grounds taken by the assessee and direct the A.O. to treat the interest on the borrowed capital as part of cost of acquisition.
5. In the result, assessee's appeal is allowed.
3 ITA 346/M/2009 Mrs. Sanika Shilotri Order pronounced in the open court on this day of 13th April 2011.
Sd/- Sd/-
(P.M. JAGTAP) (R.S. PADVEKAR)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Mumbai, Date: 13th April 2011
Copy to:-
1) The Appellant.
2) The Respondent.
3) The CIT (A) Cent -II, Mumbai.
4) The CIT Central -IV, Mumbai.
5) The D.R. "E" Bench, Mumbai.
By Order
/ / True Copy / /
Asstt. Registrar
I.T.A.T., Mumbai
*Chavan
4 ITA 346/M/2009
Mrs. Sanika Shilotri
Sr.N. Concerned
Episode of an order Date Initials
1 Draft dictated on 04.05.2011 Sr.PS
2 Draft placed before author 05.05.2011 Sr.PS
3 Draft proposed & placed before the second Member JM/AM
4 Draft discussed/approved by Second Member JM/AM
5 Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS Sr.PS/PS
6 Kept for pronouncement on Sr.PS/PS
7 File sent to the Bench Clerk Sr.PS/PS
8 Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk 9 Date of dispatch of Order