9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (4) TMI 13X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l as in the case of Gujarat Power Corporation Ltd. vs. ITO reported at (2012 (11) TMI 181 - Gujarat High Court), the Tribunal has correctly allowed the appeal by deleting the addition made by the AO. The Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court affirmed the view taken by the Tribunal who has also has gone by its earlier decision in respect of the very assessee for the earlier assessment year 2007-2008 and assessment year 2010-2011 - Decided in favour of assessee. - Tax Appeal No. 71 of 2015 - - - Dated:- 5-3-2015 - Jayant Patel And S. H. Vora,JJ. For the Appellant : Mr Sudhir M Mehta, Adv. For the Respondent : Mr B S Soparkar, Adv. ORDER (Per : Honourable Mr. Justice Jayant Patel) 1. The revenue has preferred the prese ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red in the case of CIT vs. Indo Gulf Fertilizer Chemical Corpn.Ltd. reported at (2006) 280 ITR 621 (All.). 5.2. On the contrary, the ld.Sr.counsel for the assessee submitted that the AO has wrongly applied the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals Fertilizers Ltd. vs. CIT reported at (1997) 227 ITR 172 (SC). He submitted that the assessee is only a nodal agency supervising the work assigned by the different agencies and the advances given as per the agreement were placed in fixed deposits. The interest so accrued was not offered for tax since such interest was credited to the respective accounts of the agencies and utilized for the purpose of projects. He submitted that under the identical f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appeal affirming the view of the Hon'ble Tribunal and held that no error has been committed by the Tribunal in deleting the addition of ₹ 1,25,44,938/- made by the A0 treating it as the income of the assessee. The facts before the Hon'ble High Court in the case of CIT vs. Sar Infracon Pvt.Ltd.(supra) were that the A0 made addition in respect of the interest eared by the assessee on a sum of ₹ 16.70 crores, which was received by it by way of grant from the Central Government and contribution/grant received from Gujarat Hira Bourse which sum was invested in the fixed deposits and the interest earned on the said fixed deposit can be said to be income as the assessee itself claimed refund of TDS deducted on the interest ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t appeal before this Court. 3. We have heard Mr. Sudhir Mehta, learned counsel appearing for the appellant - revenue and Mr. Soparkar, learned counsel appearing by caveat for the original assessee. 4. The reasons recorded by the Tribunal show that the Tribunal has gone by its earlier decision in respect of the very assessee for the earlier assessment year. Learned counsel appearing for both the sides have brought to our notice the decision of this Court, one in Tax Appeal No.1181 of 2014 decided on 13.11.2014 and another in Tax Appeal No.1248 of 2014 decided on 11.12.2014 in respect of the assessment year 2007-2008 and assessment year 2010-2011 respectively and as per the said decisions, it was found by this Court that the issue is al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
