9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (6) TMI 1059X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee-company and was in the nature of capital receipt as held in the assessee s own case in the AYs 2013-14 2014-15. The objection of the Department is that the assessee had not shown any nexus between the funds borrowed and the specific investment made by it, is not found relevant as such nexus has to be examined in the year in which the investments were made for the first time. In the present case, the investments were made in the earlier years that is continuing in the current year and the assessee-company is deriving interest income on the Fixed Deposits made by it in the earlier years. Respectfully following the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench in the AYs 2013-14 2014-15 [ 2020 (3) TMI 1194 - ITAT AHMEDABAD] we hold that the inter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncome despite the fact that the facts of the case of M/s.Adani Power Maharashtra Limited (on which Hon ble ITAT, Ahmedabad relied upon in ITA Nos.1642 1643/Ahd/2018) are different as in the instant case as the assessee did not claim capitalization of interest in ITR, while in the case of Adani Power Maharashtra Limited assessee itself claimed in ITR. 2) on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the learned CIT(A) erred in granting relief of Rs. 2,96,67,323/- [for AY 2016-17] and Rs. 2,99,42,445/- [for AY 2017-18] to the assessee on account of interest income holding that the same is capital receipts ignoring the facts that interest income on FD is assessable under the head Income from other sources as held by the Hon ble ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o hold that the said interest income was in the nature of capital receipt . 7. The Ld.AR submitted that an identical issue was involved in assessee s own case for AYs 2013-14 2014-15 and the Ld.ITAT Ahmedabad Bench B had held in ITA Nos.1642 1643/Ahd/2018 vide order dated 06/03/2020 that the interest income earned on Fixed Deposits pertaining to prior period commencement of business of the assessee should be treated as capital receipt . Thus, the issue is squarely covered in favour of assessee by the earlier decision of the Tribunal. 8. We have carefully considered the submissions of both the sides. It is found that an identical issue was involved in the appellant s own case for the AYs 2013-14 2015-16 before the Tribunal, which was decided ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -14 2014-15. The objection of the Department is that the assessee had not shown any nexus between the funds borrowed and the specific investment made by it, is not found relevant as such nexus has to be examined in the year in which the investments were made for the first time. In the present case, the investments were made in the earlier years that is continuing in the current year and the assessee-company is deriving interest income on the Fixed Deposits made by it in the earlier years. Respectfully following the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench in the AYs 2013-14 2014-15, we hold that the interest income earned on Fixed Deposits pertaining to the prior period commencement of business was in the nature of capital receipt . As held in tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
