Income Tax

Interest income paid on Interest Bearing Maintenance Security by RWA allowable

Interest Income paid on Interest Bearing Maintenance Security by Resident Welfare Association held to be allowable expenditure u/s 57(iii)

ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 2964 (2019) (05) ITAT

Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon by the parties:
Belaire Condominium Association vs. ITO
Bangalore Club vs. CIT 350 ITR 509.  

In this case, the appeal by the assessee was directed against the order passed by the CIT(A).

The Assessee was a Resident Welfare Association (RWA). The Assessing Officer, in the order passed u/s 143(3) disallowed the amount of interest paid to members from the interest received on the ground that the deduction is not allowed as per section 57(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961  (the Act).

In appeal, the CIT(A) upheld the action of the Assessing Officer by relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

Before the Tribunal, the assessee contened that the Assessing Officer had disregarded the fact that the Interest paid to Members is out of Maintenance Security held separately for each member by RWA. It was also contended that the said Interest paid to each members had been made after deduction of Tax at Source and was offered for Taxation in the hands of members. Therefore, addition made amounted to to Double Taxation which was against the principles of Taxation.

It was submitted that the assessee had received interest on account of interest bearing maintenance security kept with banks and had also paid interest to members being on interest bearing maintenance security. The net interest income was offered in the income-tax return as ‘Interest income.’

It was further submitted that in the case of sister concern of the assessee, the Tribunal under identical circumstances had deleted the addition made by the Assessing Officer and upheld by the CIT(A).

The Tribunal observed that in the case of the sister RWA of the assessee, the Coordinate Bench had rejected the contention of the Revenue that the interest expenditure had not been incurred to earn interest income. The Bench held that it was not a case of exemption on the principle of mutuality.

Following the said decision , the Tribunal set aside the order of the CIT(A) and directed the Assessing Officer to delete the addition.

Download Full Judgment Click Here >>

Share

Recent Posts

  • GST

GST Deptt. to coordinate with State Mining Authorities to obtain illegal mining information

CBIC has issued GST Instruction No. 01/2026-GST dated 03 August 2026 to ensure coordination between the CGST Department and State…

6 hours ago
  • Income Tax

Assessee eligible for Chapter VIA deduction u/s 80IE on increased income due to disallownces

Assessee is eligible for claiming deduction under Chapter VIA under Section 80IE of the Income Tax Act 1961 on the…

2 days ago
  • Income Tax

Assessee filing ITR under presumptive tax can’t be faulted for not giving details not mandated

Assessee could not be faulted for showing only cash in hand and bank balance as capital following presumptive taxation when…

2 days ago
  • Income Tax

Sale of flats in a real estate project held capital gains considering intention of assessee

Sale of flats in a real estate project held capital gains as intention of the assesee was to hold that…

3 days ago
  • Income Tax

Interest liability recognised by journal entries at the close of year, can’t be termed as fictitious – ITAT

Merely because interest liability was recognised by journal entries at the close of the year, it does not make expenditure…

4 days ago
  • Income Tax

Cash deposits in bank which were immediately transferred to other accounts – addition deleted

Addition for cash deposits in bank account which were immediately transferred to other accounts deleted in absence any enquiry by…

4 days ago