2010 (4) TMI 1154

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of ldCIT(A) dated 3.11.2009 and pertains to A.Y. 2006-07. 2. The issue raised is that the ldCIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of ₹ 22,66,693/- made on account of interest earned on infrastructure development fund. 3. In this case the assessee is a local authority engaged in the work of development of town area through fee and cha .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e way interest earned from such fund does not relate to Saharanpur Development Authority and is thus, not a part of income of Saharanpur Development Authority. The AO did not accept these contentions and made addition of ₹ 22,66,693/-. 4. Upon assessee's appeal the ldCIT(A) noted the assesee submissions that on identical issue in the A.Y. 2004-05 the ITAT in order no. ITA 02/Del/2008 vi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rought to tax the principle amount as income of the assesee. If his logic is accepted then all the fees etc. over and above the expenditure ought to have been examined as income of the assessee....................". Finding the facts of the case identical the ldCIT(A) deleted the addition following the ratio from the ITAT order for A.Y. 2004-05. 5. Against this order the Revenue is in appea .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X