9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 1520X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessment year 2008-2009. In this appeal, assessee raised the following grounds which read as under: 1. a) The Ld CIT (A) has erred in treating the interest income of ₹ 25,35,358/- as income from other sources u/s 56(id) of the Act. b) the Ld CIT (A) has erred in reducing the profit u/s 10A from ₹ 25,60,91,013/- to ₹ 25,35,58,063/-. c) The Ld CIT (A) has erred in not appreciating the facts of the case and not applying the correct ratio of the decisions cited before her. d) the Ld CIT (A) erred in confirming the disallowance of exemption under section 10A in respect of interest of ₹ 25,35,358/- earned on FDs kept with the bank by way of margin for the purpose of the appellant s business. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 28 onward and read out the relevant instances of the bank insisting the assessee to prepare term deposits in the bank. Further, bringing our attention to various decisions of the Tribunal, wherein one of us (AM) to the order in the case of ACIT vs. M/s. Prestress Wire Industries in ITA No. 8418/M/2010 (AY 2007-2008) and ITA No. 6312/M/2011 (AY 2008-2009) and others dated 31.1.2014, Ld Counsel for the assessee mentioned that the said decision is relevant for the proposition that, under the identical factual matrix, the receipts were treated as business receipts and declared as eligible for deduction u/s 80IA of the Act. In this regard, he brought our attention to the relevant paras 14 to 16 of the said Tribunal s order (supra). Further, br ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecom Ltd 287 ITR 479 (Del) iii) CIT vs. Karnal Cooperative Sugar Mills Ltd 243 ITR 2 (SC) iv) CIT vs. Indo Swiss Jewells Ltd 284 ITR 389 (Bom) 15. On the other hand, Ld DR dutifully relied on the order of the AO. 16. We have heard both the parties and perused the orders of the Revenue Authorities as well as citations quoted by the Ld Counsel along with the relevant material placed before us. On perusal of the cited judgments of the higher judiciary, we find that they are relevant for the proposition that the there is no question of isolating the interest received on margin money paid for obtaining bank guarantee and assessing it as separate income under section 56. Therefore, agree with the view of the Tribunal that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
