SC: Under RTE Act, States Cannot Justify Low Teacher Pay by Citing Centre’s Failure to Release Funds  ||  Supreme Court: While a Child’s Welfare is Paramount, It is Not the Sole Factor in Custody Disputes  ||  Supreme Court: High Court Cannot Reject a Plaint While Exercising Jurisdiction under Article 227  ||  SC: Merely Leasing an Apartment Does Not Bar a Flat Buyer’s Consumer Complaint Against the Builder  ||  Delhi HC: Unproven Adultery Allegations Cannot be Used to Deny Interim Maintenance under the DV Act  ||  Bombay HC: Storing Items in a Fridge isn’t Manufacturing and Doesn’t Make Premises a Factory  ||  Kerala HC: Disability Pension is Not Payable if the Condition is Unrelated to Military Service  ||  Supreme Court: Award Valid Even If Passed After Mandate Expiry When Court Extends Time  ||  Jharkhand HC: Regular Bail Plea During Interim Bail is Not Maintainable under Section 483 BNSS  ||  Cal HC: Theft Claims and Public Humiliation Alone Don’t Amount To Abetment of Suicide U/S 306 IPC    

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. N.S. Software - (High Court of Delhi) (10 Jul 2023)

Assessee need not to demonstrate commercial expediency in each year concerning a loan transaction

MANU/DE/4379/2023

Direct Taxation

In facts of present case, the Assessing Officer (AO) concluded that, the disallowance was mandated in view of the fact that the Respondent/Assessee had not been able to demonstrate "commercial expediency". Accordingly, the AO disallowed interest expenses amounting to Rs. 5,16,16,215in proportion to the non-interest bearing advances extended to each of the partners.

The Respondent/Assessee, being aggrieved by the order, preferred an appeal with the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). CIT(A), via order, reversed the view taken by the AO. The Appellant/revenue carried the matter in appeal to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ["Tribunal"]. The Tribunal concurred with the CIT(A) and dismissed the appeal of the Appellant/revenue.

The moot point which arises for consideration is, does the Respondent/Assessee need to demonstrate commercial expediency in each year concerning a loan transaction which took place in and about AY 2005-06?

If the loan availed on account of stated commercial expediency, which has, in a sense, received the imprimatur of the Appellant/revenue, when the loan was first taken and several years thereafter, surely, the Respondent/Assessee is not required, once again, to demonstrate commercial expediency in each year. The AO seems to have disregarded this aspect in the AY in issue.

Second, the interest expenditure is revenue neutral. In case this was to be disallowed in the hands of respondent/assessee i.e., the partnership firm, it would have to be allowed in the hands of the partners. Present Court is not inclined to interfere with the decision of the Tribunal.

Tags : ASSESSMENT   INTEREST EXPENSES   DISALLOWANCE  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved