News Update

PM-STIAC discusses accelerating Industry-Academia Partnership for Research and InnovationIndia, Singapore hold dialogue over cyber policy44 bids received under 10th Round of Commercial Coal Mine AuctionsCops arrest former Dy PM of Nepal in cooperative fraud casePuri highlights India's Petrochemical potential at India Chem 2024UN reports record high cocaine production in ColombiaMinister unveils 'Aviation Park' showcasing India's Aviation HeritageED finds PFI wanted to start Islamic movement in IndiaBlocking Credit - Rule 86ASEBI says investors can use 3-in-1 accounts to apply online for securitiesI-T- Penalty u/s 271(1)(b) need not be imposed when assessee moved an adjournment application & later complied with notice u/s 142(1): ITAT4 Kanwariyas killed as vehicle runs over them in Banka, BiharI-T- Accounting principles do not prescribe maintaining of a day-to-day stock register, and the books of accounts cannot be rejected on this basis alone: ITATUN food looted and diverted to army in EthiopiaCus - Alleged breach of conditions for operating public bonded warehouse; CESTAT rightly rejected allegations, having found no evidence of any such breach: HCUS budget deficit surges beyond USD 1.8 trillionST - Onus for proving admissibility of Cenvat Credit rests with service provider under Rule 9(6) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004: CESTATIf China goes into Taiwan, Trump promises to impose additional tariffsRussians love Indian films; Putin lauds BollywoodCus - Classification of goods is to be determined in accordance with Customs Tariff Act & General Interpretative Rules; Country-of-Origin Certificate may offer some guidance, but cannot solely dictate classification: CESTATCus - Benefit of such Country-of-Origin certificates cannot be denied if all relevant conditions are met under the applicable Customs Tariff rules: CESTATCuban power grid collapses; Country plunges into darknessCus - As per trite law, merely claiming a classification or exemption does not constitute mis-declaration or suppression - any misclassification does not equate to willful intent to evade duty: CESTATKarnataka mulling over 2% fee on aggregator platforms to bankroll gig worker welfare fundCus - Extended limitation cannot be invoked in case of assessee who is a regular importer with a consistent classification approach: CESTAT
 
I-T - If interest liability accrued during relevant A.Y was not actually paid back and rather adjusted into further bank loan, then it is not eligible for deduction u/s 43B: SC

By TIOL News Service

NEW DELHI, FEB 26, 2019: THE ISSUE BEFORE THE APEX COURT IS - Whether once interest liability accrued during relevant assessment year was not actually paid back and rather adjusted into further bank loan, is not eligible for deduction u/s 43B. YES IS THE VERDICT.

Facts of the case:

The assessee company filed its return declaring total loss of Rs.3,76,70,656/-. The said return was processed and the assessment was passed, wherein the AO disallowed the deduction claimed by assessee with regard to payment of interest amounting to Rs.2,51,31,154/- to the IDBI Bank, referring to the CBDT Circular dated Dec 16, 1988. On appeal, the CIT(A) found that the fact that the entry pertaining to the interest element outstanding to financial institutions had been reversed after receipt of funds of Rs.8 crores from IDBI, substantiates the contention of assessee company that the entries relating to interest outstanding with reference the said institutions had been squared up and a new credit entry of loan of IDBI was appearing in the balance sheet. The counsel for assessee pleaded that since no interest payment was outstanding and the amount was paid off, the expenditure of interest was allowable u/s 43B. It was further added that in case the loan had been disbursed in two parts; one to meet the interest outstanding and the balance for financial assistance, still the entries in the books of account would remain the same and the outstanding interest would have been NIL. Hence, the CIT(A) held that the disallowance made by AO contrary to the substance of the transaction and the provisions of Section 43B.

Not satisfied, the Revenue approached the Tribunal, wherein the addition made by AO u/s 43B stood deleted, on conversion of upaid interest into a funded interest loan treating the same as interest payment. The matter ultimately reached High Court, which upheld the order of ITAT, relying on the judgment of Gujarat High Court in case of Commissioner of Income Tax v. Bhagwati Autocast Ltd. [261 ITR 481].

Apex Court held:

++ it is noted that Explanation 3C was inserted by the Finance Act, 2006 and it was declared that "a deduction of any sum, being interest payable under clause (d) of section 43B, shall be allowed if such interest has been actually paid and any interest referred to in that clause which has been converted into a loan or borrowing shall not be deemed to have been actually paid." The interest liability which accrued during the relevant assessment year was not actually paid back by the assessee, rather was sought to be adjusted in the further loan of Rs.8 crores which was obtained by the IDBI Bank. The judgment of Delhi High Court relied upon by Revenue's counsel refers to Section 43B as well as Explanation 3C, and held that Explanation 3C having retrospective effect with effect from April 01, 1989 shall be applicable to the year in question. The statutory Explanation 3C inserted by the Finance Act, 2006 is thus squarely applicable in the facts of the present case. It appears that the attention of High Court was not invited to Explanation 3C. Hence, the AO has rightly disallowed the deduction claimed by assessee.

(See 2019-TIOL-81-SC-IT)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

TIOL Tube Latest

Shri Samrat Choudhary, Hon’ble Deputy CM & FM of State of Bihar, delivering inaugural speech at TIOL Tax Congress 2024.



Justice A K Patnaik, Mentor to Hon'ble Jury for TIOL Awards 2024, addressing the gathering at the event.