2014 (10) TMI 587 - HC - Income Tax

Interest from security received as income - Principle of consistency Held that - The Tribunal had applied and followed its order in the case of the same assessee for prior AY 2000-01 - the only question of law projected as substantial one, cannot be entertained - A pure factual finding cannot be re-appreciated and reapprised - That finding has been consistently rendered by the Tribunal and for prior assessment years in the case of the very assessee - If the Tribunal follows and applies it on the same facts for a subsequent assessment year, that exercise undertaken by the Tribunal cannot be termed as perverse or vitiated by any error of law, apparent on the face of record Decided against revenue.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to Tribunal's order on income tax appeal for assessment year 2003-04 regarding interest income accrual basis vs. actual receipt basis.

Analysis:
The appeal challenged the Tribunal's order on income tax appeal for the assessment year 2003-04, specifically regarding the treatment of interest income. The revenue contended that the interest income accrued should have been taxed on accrual basis as per the mercantile system of accounting, rather than on actual receipt basis as done by the assessee, a banking company. The revenue argued that the assessee's inconsistent stance on interest liability under section 43B(d) of the Income Tax Act should not have been accepted. The revenue emphasized the need for consistency in the adopted accounting system for tax purposes. The revenue sought admission of the appeal based on these grounds.

In response, the counsel for the respondent bank/assessee highlighted the revenue's persistent challenge on the same issue for multiple assessment years, including 2000-01, 2001-02, and 2004-05. The Tribunal had consistently ruled in favor of the assessee in previous years, and these decisions were upheld by the Court. Referring to specific cases, the counsel demonstrated the Court's dismissal of revenue appeals based on the Tribunal's factual findings and the consistent application of the law. The counsel argued that the Tribunal's decision for the current assessment year was in line with its previous rulings for the same assessee, indicating a factual finding that did not warrant reevaluation by the Court.

Upon review, the Court found that the Tribunal had indeed applied its previous decision for the same assessee in the assessment year 2000-01 to the current case. The Court noted that the Tribunal's conclusion was based on consistent factual findings for prior assessment years, and there was no indication of any error of law. The Court emphasized that a pure factual finding, especially when consistently rendered by the Tribunal, should not be reexamined or deemed as flawed unless there is a clear legal error. Consequently, the Court dismissed the appeal, stating that the substantial question of law raised could not be entertained in light of the consistent application of law and factual findings by the Tribunal. The appeal was rejected, and no costs were awarded.