Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chennai
Acit Circle 1, Namakkal vs Pkpn Spinning Mills Pvt. Ltd., Namakkal on 11 September, 2018
आयकर अपील य अ
धकरण, 'डी' यायपीठ, चे नई
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
' D' BENCH : CHENNAI
ी जॉज माथन, या यक सद
य के सम
एवं ए. मोहन अलंकामणी, लेखा सद
य
BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER &
SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.2797,2798 & 2799/Chny/2017
नधा रण वष /Assessment years:2008-09, 2010-11 & 2011-12
The Assistant Commissioner of Vs. M/s.PKPN Spinning Mills Pvt
Income Tax, Circle-I, Ltd.,
Namakkal. 637 001. 6,Bye Pass Road, Pallipalayam,
Namakkal 638 006.
[PAN AABCP 5919 K]
(अपीलाथ /Appellant) ( यथ /Respondent)
अपीलाथ! क" ओर से/ Appellant by : Mrs.S.Vijayaprabha, JCIT,D.R
$%यथ! क" ओर से /Respondent by : Mr.Saroj Kumar Parida,Advocate
सन
ु वाई क" तार)ख/Date of Hearing : 11-09-2018
घोषणा क" तार)ख /Date of Pronouncement : 11-09-2018
आदे श / O R D E R
PER GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
ITA Nos.2797, 2798 & 2799/Chny/2017 are appeals filed by Revenue against the separate Orders passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Salem in Appeal Nos.56/2016-17, & 57/2016-17 & 58/2016-17, all dated 30.08.2017 for the assessment years 2008-09, 2010-11 & 2011-12 respectively.
2. Mrs.S.Vijayaprabha represented on behalf of the Revenue, and Mr.Saroj Kumar Parida represented on behalf of the Assessee.
:- 2 -: ITA Nos.2797 to 2799/Chny./2017 3. When the appeals are taken up for hearing, the
representative for the Revenue fairly submitted that the tax effect involved in the appeal No.2798/Chny/2017 for assessment year 2010- 11 is below the prescribed limit. It was a further submission that the CBDT in its latest Circular No.3/2018 dated 11.07.2018 instructed its officers to withdraw all the appeals pending before the ITAT where the tax effect is less than `20 lakhs. Consequently, the appeal of Revenue in ITA No.2798/Chny/2017 for assessment year 2010-11 is dismissed on account of tax effect.
4. In respect of appeals in 2797/Chny/2017 & 2799/Chny/2017, it was submitted by ld.D.R that the issue was against the order of Ld.CIT(A) in deleting the addition made by the ld. Assessing Officer on account of the disallowance of interest expenses in respect of interest attributable to the interest free loans advanced by the assessee to the sister concerns of the assessee. It was a submission that the Ld.CIT(A) had deleted the addition by following the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of S.A. Builders Ltd., Vs. CIT [288 ITR 1 (SC)]. It was a further submission that the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in S.A. Builders Ltd., was now under review. It was a submission that the balance sheet and ledger A/cs, which had been produced first time before the Ld.CIT(A), was not confronted to the ld.
Assessing Officer and consequently, there was violation of
:- 3 -: ITA Nos.2797 to 2799/Chny./2017
Rule-46A(3) of Income Tax Rules, 1962. It was a prayer that the order of the CIT(Appeals) is liable to be reversed.
5. In reply, ld.A.R vehemently supported the order of the CIT(Appeals).
6. We have considered the rival submissions. Admittedly, the balance sheets and ledger accounts in respect of the assessee for the relevant assessment years and earlier assessment years cannot be considered as fresh evidence, as the same are available before the ld. Assessing Officer in view of the fact that the assessment u/s.143(3) of the Act was done by the ld. Assessing Officer. A perusal of the balance sheet and Profit And Loss Account of the assessee clearly shows that the assessee has `22.69 crores in the form of capital & Reserve for assessment year 2008-09, `24.78 crores for assessment year 2009-10, `32.31 crores for assessment year 2010-11 and `34.07 crores for assessment year 2011-12. The assessee has also cash profits to an extent of `5.37 crores for assessment year 2008-09, `10.97 crores for assessment year 2009-10, `5.08 crores for assessment year 2010-11 and `17.41 crores for assessment year 2011-12. As against this, the loan given totaled to `5.39 crores for assessment year 2008-09, `7.69 crores for assessment year 2009-10, `2.83 crores for assessment year 2010-11 and `09.49 crores for assessment year 2011-12. This clearly :- 4 -: ITA Nos.2797 to 2799/Chny./2017 shows that the assessee had adequate non-interest bearing funds available with it for giving the advances to the sister concerns. This being so, as the Revenue has not been able to disprove these specific facts, we are of the view that the order of CIT(Appeals) following the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of S.A. Builders Ltd., referred to supra, as also the decision of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Hotel Savera ( 239 ITR 795 (Mad.) ) is on the right footing and does not call for any interference. Both the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos.2797/Chny/2017 & 2799/Chny/2017 for assessment years 2008-09 & 2011-12 stand dismissed.
7. In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court after conclusion of hearing on 11th September, 2018, at Chennai.
Sd/- Sd/-
(ए. मोहन अलंकामणी) ( जॉज माथन)
(A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY) (GEORGE MATHAN)
लेखा सद#य /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER या$यक सद#य/JUDICIAL MEMBER
चे नई/Chennai
.दनांक/Dated: 11th September, 2018.
K S Sundaram
आदे श क" $ त0ल1प अ2े1षत/Copy to:
1. अपीलाथ!/Appellant 3. आयकर आयु3त (अपील)/CIT(A) 5. 1वभागीय $ त न6ध/DR
2. $%यथ!/Respondent 4. आयकर आयु3त/CIT 6. गाड फाईल/GF