Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Tokai Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd Vs ITO (ITAT Pune)
Appeal Number : ITA No.571/PUN/2023
Date of Judgement/Order : 16/01/2024
Related Assessment Year : 2018-19
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Tokai Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd Vs ITO (ITAT Pune)

Introduction: The case of Tokai Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd vs Income Tax Officer (ITAT Pune) revolves around the disallowance of interest expenses under various sections of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appellant contested several grounds related to interest payments, seeking relief from the tax authority’s decision. The judgment provides insights into the application of relevant sections of the Act concerning interest deductions.

Detailed Analysis: The first substantive issue addressed by the tribunal pertained to the disallowance of interest expenses amounting to Rs. 3,13,44,000 under section 43B of the Income Tax Act. The Revenue contended that this sum, related to the National Co­operative Development Corporation (NCDC), fell within the purview of section 43B(d). However, the tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, citing judicial consistency and previous rulings in similar cases. It emphasized that loans received through a state government do not attract section 43B(d), thus allowing the appellant’s claim.

Regarding the second substantive issue concerning interest deduction paid to The Maharashtra State Co­operative Bank, the tribunal decided to refer the matter back to the Assessing Officer for further verification. The appellant argued that since it commenced sugar production in the relevant previous year, it should not be subject to certain provisions. However, lacking substantial evidence, the tribunal deemed it necessary to reassess the issue.

The next set of substantive grounds focused on interest payments to various entities and whether they attracted TDS deduction under section 194A. The tribunal rejected the Revenue’s contention, stating that such payments did not fall under the specified provisions. Consequently, the appellant succeeded in these grounds.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031