Income Tax

Loan pre-payment premium/charges paid not capital expenditure but Revenue – HC

Loan pre-payment premium/charges paid for reducing interest liability not result in acquisition of any asset and not a capital but Revenue expenditure 

ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 2890 (2019) (04) HC

The instant appeal was filed by the Revenue against the impugned order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal) in deleting the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer (AO) towards the premium paid on prepayment of loan by the assessee.

The case of the Revenue was that the said expenditure was not allowable since it was capital in nature and the same should not treated as revenue expenditure.

The Hon’ble High Court observed that the AO, in a preceeding assessment year himself had allowed deduction on payment of such premium as revenue expenditure and in yet another AY , the AO had disallowed the same by treating the payment of such premium as capital expenditure while the CIT (appeals) had deleted the said addition and the Tribunal had upheld the order of CIT (appeals) deleting such addition.

The Hon’ble High Court opined that the Tribunal was justified in allowing the claim of deduction on payment of premium of pre payment of the loan to reduce its interest burden in view of falling interest rate.

The Hon’ble High Court opined that the  expenditure incurred by the assessee by way of premium paid on pre payment of loan for reducing interest the liability could not be called acquisition of any asset and could not be treated as capital expenditure and it has to be allowed as revenue expenditure.

Accordingly, the appeal of the Revenue was dismissed.

Download Full Judgment Click Here >>

----------- Similar Posts: -----------
Share

Recent Posts

  • Income Tax

Jewellery purportedly received from grandparent under Will added as unexplained credits

Addition u/s 68 for jewellery purportedly received on death of grandparent under Will upheld. In a recent judgment, ITAT upheld…

14 hours ago
  • bankruptcy

SC lays down tests to determine if a debt is financial debt or operational under IBC

Supreme Court lays down tests to determine whether a debt is a financial debt or an operational debt under IBC…

17 hours ago
  • Income Tax

Commonality of directors of companies does not mean deposits received was bogus

Merely because directors of two companies were common not mean that deposits received was bogus and companies were shell companies…

2 days ago
  • ITAT

Application though named as rectification but if tax is not legitimate, it also touches merit: HC

Application though named as rectification but if tax imposed is not legitimate then it also touches upon the merit –…

2 days ago
  • Income Tax

Cost of acquisition as on 01.04.1981 taken as per valuer report by reverse indexing of FMV

Cost of acquisition as on 01.04.1981 taken as per valuer report by reverse indexing of current FMV to be further…

2 days ago
  • Income Tax

AO was directed to serve notice of hearing through physical mode upon assessee 

ITAT directed AO to serve notice of hearing both through electronic and physical mode upon the assessee  In a recent…

2 days ago