Industrial Cables (India) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Patiala & anr
[Citation -2020-LL-0120-94]

Citation 2020-LL-0120-94
Appellant Name Industrial Cables (India) Ltd.
Respondent Name Commissioner of Income-tax, Patiala & anr.
Court HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 20/01/2020
Assessment Year 1990-91
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags independent evidence • interest free loans • claim of interest • foreign travel • disallowance of claim • voluntary disclosure • travel expense


389 IN HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No.129 of 2000 (O&M) Date of decision : 20.01.2020 M/s Industrial Cables (India) Ltd. Appellant versus Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala & anr. Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN Present : Mr. Alok Mittal, Advocate for appellant. Mr. Jitin Kohli, Jr. Standing Counsel for Mr. Kunal Sharma, Sr. Standing Counsel for respondents. AJAY TEWARI, J. (Oral) 1 This appeal has been filed by Assessee under Section 260-A of Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short Act) against order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh in ITA No.487/Chandi/1992 for assessment year 1990-1991 disallowing credit of Rs.89,854/- to sister concerns on specific ground that advances given to sisters concerns were not proved to be relating to trading activities of Assessee. 2 following questions of law have been raised in present appeal :- (a) Whether in facts and circumstances of case, orders annexures P-1, P-2 and P-3 are legally sustainable? POOJA SHARMA 2020.01.29 15:44 I attest to accuracy and integrity of this document ITA No.129 of 2000 (O&M) -2- (b) Whether in facts and circumstances of case, addition of Rs.89,854/- on account of disallowance on claim of interest free loans can be sustained at law in view of decision of Hon'ble Madras High Court in case of 'C.I.T. Versus Hotel Savera reported in 239 I.T.R. 795? (c) Whether in facts and circumstances of case, addition of Rs.89,854/- on account of disallowance of claim of interest fee loans can be sustained at law, same being made on basis of mere presumptions and conjectures without there being any independent evidence on record to show that amount forwarded were out of borrowed funds of assessee-appellant? (d) Whether in facts and circumstances of case, addition of 50% of Rs.36,040/- on account of disallowance under rule 6D of Foreign Travel Expenses can be sustained at law inspite of disclosure made being voluantry disclosure by assessee-appellant and there being no independent and corroborative evidence on record to show expenses allegedly made by assessee-appellant? 3 submission of learned counsel for appellant is that in view of decision of Supreme Court in S.A.Builders Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and another, 2007 (15) SCC 147 and Bright Enterprises (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (2016) 381 ITR (P&H) (of this Court) matter be remanded back to Tribunal for fresh decision in accordance with law. 4 Counsel for respondent-revenue is not in position to cite any contrary judgment. 5 As regards, issue No.4 of substantial question of law of dis-allowance of travel expenses of Directors, no question of law arises. Consequently, same is rejected. POOJA SHARMA 2020.01.29 15:44 I attest to accuracy and integrity of this document ITA No.129 of 2000 (O&M) -3- 6 In circumstances, we deem it appropriate to allow this appeal to above mentioned limited extent, set aside impugned order and remand matter back to Tribunal for taking decision as per law. 7 Parties through counsel are directed to appeal before Tribunal on 16.03.2020. 8 Since main case has been decided, pending civil miscellaneous application, if any, also stands disposed of. (AJAY TEWARI) JUDGE (AVNEESH JHINGAN) JUDGE 20.01.2020 pooja sharma-I Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No POOJA SHARMA 2020.01.29 15:44 I attest to accuracy and integrity of this document Industrial Cables (India) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Patiala & anr
Report Error