- (1.) BY this appeal, the revenue seeks to challenge the order of the Tribunal dated 31 -3 -2003. While framing various substantial questions of law, however, by order dated 20 -9 -2004, the appeal was admitted on the following substantial question of law: Whether the learned Tribunal was factually and legally justified in upholding the order of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) deleting the addition made on account of interest on debtors, in spite of the fact that the assessee himself had admitted before the assessing officer that interest at the rate of 1.5 per cent per month was charged on debtors ?
(2.) IT is contended by the learned Counsel for the revenue, while inviting our attention to the finding recorded at page 24 of the order by the assessing officer, who has clearly recorded that it was admitted by the assessee that he has been charging interest at the rate of 1.5 per cent per month on outstanding debtors, notwithstanding this, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) and the Tribunal have totally deleted the addition, made on account of interest, which is bad. On the other hand, learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that it has been found by the Tribunal that there is no evidence whatsoever to show that the assessee was charging any interest from the sundry debtors, as the small amounts remained outstanding in the course of business transaction and on those amounts, no interest was charged by the assessee and, therefore, the amount has been rightly deleted.
(3.) WE have considered the submissions, and have gone through the orders of the assessing authority, appellate authority, and that of the Tribunal.;