9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (9) TMI 892X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itted that the interest had been released on submission of security bond and he was not the final owner of the amount as court proceedings were still going on – Held that:- Relying upon the judgment in the case of CIT v. Karanbir Singh, [2007 (12) TMI 184 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] interest is chageable to tax – matter remanded back for reconsideration - Decided in favor of Revenue. - ITA N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t paid by the reference Court, and as such, the respondent-assessee has utilized the aforesaid interest component as his income after the receipt of the same and, therefore, is liable to pay tax thereon in terms of the judgment rendered in Rama Bai v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Andhra Pradesh, (1990) 181 ITR 400. 2. Briefly, the facts necessary for adjudication of the controversy involved, as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] which was accepted. Not satisfied with the order passed by the CIT(A), the revenue filed appeal before the Tribunal. Vide order dated 31.10.2008, Annexure A.3, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal following the decision of this Court in CIT v. Karanbir Singh, (2008) 303 ITR 231 and upheld the order of the CIT(A) in deleting the addition, holding that the question whether the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... decided on 1.9.2010 and The CIT, Faridabad v. Bir Singh (HUF), Ballabgarh, ITA No.209 of 2004, decided on 27.10.2010 to submit that the matter may be decided afresh keeping in view the latest position of law. 4. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant-revenue. No one has appeared on behalf of the respondent-assessee. 5. This Court in Karambir Singh's case (supra) allowed the appeal wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
