2014 (3) TMI 389 - HC - Income Tax

Deduction of interest u/s 80HHC of the Act Income of interest from the FDRs - Held that - The ITAT has not gone into the merits of the case, nor the issue of consistency as alleged by the assessee or the applicability of the decision in COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Versus SHRI RAM HONDA POWER EQUIP 2007 (1) TMI 86 - HIGH COURT, DELHI - While the CIT (Appeals) did deal with the application of the judgment in Shri Ram Honda, the ITAT has taken a liberal and beneficial view of the matter by remanding the case to the AO to reconsider the assessment in light of that decision and the conclusions reached as regards interest income in previous years, as the order dated 27.10.2008 was silent on that question - The ITAT has not made any findings in the order, let alone determined or discussed any issue of fact or law relevant to the assessment of interest income in the case no substantial question of law arises for adjudication Decided against Assessee.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 regarding the classification of interest income from Fixed Deposit Receipts (FDRs) as either "business income" or "income from other sources" for the Assessment Year 1998-99.

Analysis:
The case involves an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, concerning the classification of interest income from Fixed Deposit Receipts (FDRs) for the Assessment Year 1998-99. The appellant, Anand Kumar, declared the interest on FDRs as "business income" under Section 80HHC of the Act, claiming a deduction. Initially, the Assessing Officer (AO) assessed the income as "income from other sources," but the ITAT later classified it as "business income." The matter was remanded to the AO based on a previous court ruling. However, in the subsequent assessment, the AO again classified the interest as "income from other sources," which was upheld by the CIT (Appeals) and further appealed to the ITAT.

The appellant argued for consistency based on the treatment of interest income in the previous assessment year. The ITAT, in its order, noted the confusion regarding the application of previous court decisions and remanded the case back to the AO for reconsideration. The ITAT refrained from making any observations on the legal aspects and allowed the appeal for statistical purposes.

The High Court found that no substantial question of law arose from the ITAT's order. The ITAT did not delve into the merits of the case, the issue of consistency, or the applicability of previous court decisions. While the CIT (Appeals) addressed the judgment in question, the ITAT decided to remand the case to the AO for a reevaluation in light of the court ruling and previous conclusions on interest income. The ITAT's order did not provide any findings or discussions on relevant legal or factual issues, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.

In conclusion, the High Court dismissed the appeal, emphasizing the absence of any substantial question of law, as the ITAT's order did not address the core legal and factual aspects of the case concerning the classification of interest income from FDRs for the Assessment Year 1998-99.