9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (11) TMI 1555 - HC - Income TaxInterest paid netted off against the interest income earned - Held that - So far as the Substantial Question of Law No. 1 is concerned, it is squarely covered in favour of the assessee, in the light of the decision of this Court in the case of Arul Mariammal Textiles Ltd., Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Coimbatore in 2018 (8) TMI 1729 - MADRAS HIGH COURT . Interest income to be assessed under the head income from other sources or business income - Hed that - Insofar as the Substantial Question of Law No. 2 is concerned, the same is covered by the decision of ACG Associated Capsules (P.) Ltd Vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Central-IV, Mumbai in 2012 (2) TMI 101 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA . Substantial Questions of Law are answered in favour of the assessee
Issues:
1. Netting off interest paid against interest income in the business of the assessee. 2. Assessment of interest income under the head 'income from other sources' despite direct nexus to the business of the assessee. Analysis: 1. The appeals were filed against the common order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal regarding the assessment years 1996-97 to 1998-99. The substantial question of law raised was whether the interest paid could be netted off against the interest income earned in the business. The counsel for the assessee relied on a decision of the Madras High Court in a similar case and argued in favor of netting off the interest paid. The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondents did not contest this argument, acknowledging that the issue was covered by previous decisions. The court, in line with the precedent, ruled in favor of the assessee on this issue. 2. The second substantial question of law pertained to the assessment of interest income under the head 'income from other sources' despite its direct connection to the business of the assessee. The counsel for the assessee cited a decision of the Supreme Court in support of their argument. The Senior Standing Counsel for the respondents did not dispute this position. The court, considering the legal precedents, held in favor of the assessee on this issue as well. Consequently, both substantial questions of law were decided in favor of the assessee, leading to the allowance of the appeals and closure of the connected miscellaneous petitions.
|
