Tax-Iii v. M/S.narang Hotel & Resorts Pvt. Ltd
High Court
09 Feb 2009 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Tax-Iii v. M/S.narang Hotel & Resorts Pvt. Ltd
Date of order
09 Feb 2009
Assessment year(s)
1985-86
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Tax-Iii v. M/S.narang Hotel & Resorts Pvt. Ltd, the High Court (2009) decided the matter.
Issue: Revenue has preferred this appeal on the following questions:- " (a) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon’ble Tribunal is right in deleting the addition of Rs.13,50,000/- and Rs.27,530/- (-2-) being the interest disallowed on borrowed funds given out for non-...
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
(-1-)
MGN
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL (LODG.) NO.846 OF 2004
The Commissioner of Income )
Tax-III )..APPELLANT
Vs.
M/s.Narang Hotel & Resorts Pvt. Ltd..RESPONDENT
Mr.Suresh Kumar for the Appellant
Ms.Shobhna Jagtiani with Mrs. Beena LPillai & Ravi
Ratesar for Respondents.
CORAM: F.I.
R.S.MOHITE, JJ.
DATED: 9th February, 2009
P.C.:
P.C.:
. Revenue has preferred this appeal on the
following questions:-
" (a) Whether on the facts and in the
circumstances of the case and in law, the
Hon’ble Tribunal is right in deleting the
addition of Rs.13,50,000/- and Rs.27,530/-
(-2-)
being the interest disallowed on borrowed
funds given out for non-business proposes in
the form of interest free allowance to
"sister concern" and another.
(b) Whether on the facts and in the
circumstances of the case and in law, the
Hon’ble Tribunal is right in deleting the
addition of Rs.11,34,773/- being the
building repair expenses of the Madras unit.
(c) Whether on the facts and in the
circumstances of the case and in law, the
Hon’ble Tribunal is right in allowing
depreciation on revolving restaurant as
plant and machinery ignoring the ratio of
the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT
vs. Anand Theatre reported in 244 ITR 182."
2. In so far as Question (a) is concerned,
admittedly there is a finding of fact recorded that
the assessee had its own surplus funds. That being
the case in our opinion the issue is directly
covered by the judgment dated 9th January, 2009 in
Income Tax Appeal No.1398 of 2008 in the case of
Commissioner of Income Tax-III vs. Reliance
Utilities and Power Limited, wherein following the
observations of the Supreme Court in East India
East IndiaPharmaceutical Works Ltd. vs. Commissioner of
Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. vs. Commissioner of
(-3-)
Income-Tax 224 ITR 627 (S.C.), we held that the
Income-Tax 224 ITR 627 (S.C.)
Income-Tax 224 ITR 627 (S.C.)
principle that would be applicable would be that if
there are funds available both interest free and
over draft and/or loans taken, then a presumption
would arise that investments would be out of the
interest free fund generated or available with the
company, if the interest free funds were sufficient
to meet the investments. In the instant case also
that presumption has been met considering the the
findings recorded.
. In so far as Question (b) is concerned, that
is purely a finding of fact. Even otherwise we find
that in respect of the assessment year 1985-86 the
Revenue did not go in appeal against the order of
the C.I.T. (Appeal).
. In so far as Question (c) is concerned, the
same is covered by our judgment in Commissioner of
Commissioner of
Income Tax vs. Narang Motels Pvt. Ltd., dated 19th
Income Tax vs. Narang Motels Pvt. Ltd., dated 19thJanuary, 2009 in ITXA No.123 of 2006.
January, 2009 in ITXA No.123 of 2006.
. Appeal accordingly disposed of.
(R.S.MOHITE, J.) (F.I.REBELLO, J.)
(R.S.MOHITE, J.) (F.I.REBELLO, J.)
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.