Real income principle governs taxability: RBI norms alone do not decide accrual, and notional interest requires legal or factual basis.

RBI prudential norms do not by themselves govern taxability under the Income-tax Act; accrual must be tested on real income principles and the facts of each transaction. The discussion notes that waived interest on an inter-corporate deposit may be excluded if genuine settlement and non-accrual are shown, interest on NPAs cannot be taxed merely because it is not recognised in accounts, and character of receipts depends on the underlying arrangement and accounting treatment. It also states that notional interest on pledged shares lacks basis without contractual entitlement, bad debts are allowable on actual write-off, reversal of NPA provisions is taxable only to the extent earlier allowed, and interest on income-tax refund is taxable as income from other sources.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether waiver of accrued interest on an inter-corporate deposit could be excluded from taxable income on the footing of non-accrual or settlement; (ii) whether interest on non-performing assets could be taxed merely because RBI norms did not permit its recognition in accounts; (iii) whether amount received from the borrower was to be treated as interest or principal; (iv) whether notional interest could be added on shares pledged as security; (v) whether bad debts written off were allowable; (vi) whether reversal of provision for NPA could be added without verifying allowance in earlier years; (vii) whether interest on income-tax refund was assessable as income from other sources; and (viii) whether corresponding book-profit adjustments under section 115JB were required.

Issue (i): whether waiver of accrued interest on an inter-corporate deposit could be excluded from taxable income on the footing of non-accrual or settlement.

Analysis: Interest was waived as part of a settlement where the outstanding principal was converted into equity. The relevant question was whether the interest had in fact accrued and whether the arrangement was genuine. Accrual depends on the factual reality of recoverability, and the Revenue had not shown any basis to treat the settlement as a device. At the same time, the claim required confirmation that the borrower had correspondingly not booked the liability.

Conclusion: The issue was answered substantially in favour of the Assessee, subject to confirmation of the corresponding liability position in the borrower's books.

Issue (ii): whether interest on non-performing assets could be taxed merely because RBI norms did not permit its recognition in accounts.

Analysis: The statutory scheme under section 145 governs computation of income, but accrual remains a question of fact. RBI prudential norms are disclosure and presentation norms and do not by themselves determine taxable income. However, the existence or otherwise of real accrual must be examined account-wise on the facts, without treating the NPA classification as conclusive.

Conclusion: The addition was not finally sustained and the matter was remanded for fresh factual determination, leaving the Assessee with an opportunity to establish non-accrual.

Issue (iii): whether amount received from the borrower was to be treated as interest or principal.

Analysis: The characterization of the receipt depended on the actual arrangement between the parties and the corresponding accounting treatment by the borrower. In the absence of complete verification of the underlying documents and the other side's treatment, a final determination could not be made.

Conclusion: The issue was remanded for verification, with no final adverse finding sustained against the Assessee at that stage.

Issue (iv): whether notional interest could be added on shares pledged as security.

Analysis: The pledge of shares was a non-fund-based arrangement connected with group financing, and there was no material showing any contractual entitlement to guarantee fee, commission, or interest. A notional addition cannot be made without factual or legal foundation.

Conclusion: The addition was deleted in favour of the Assessee.

Issue (v): whether bad debts written off were allowable.

Analysis: The loans were written off in the accounts, and under the settled law, actual write-off is sufficient for a claim under section 36(1)(vii) read with section 36(2), unless the Revenue shows the write-off to be not genuine. No such contrary material was established.

Conclusion: The disallowance was deleted in favour of the Assessee.

Issue (vi): whether reversal of provision for NPA could be added without verifying allowance in earlier years.

Analysis: A reversal can be brought to tax only to the extent the corresponding provision had earlier been allowed as deduction. The record did not show whether, and to what extent, the provision had actually been allowed in prior assessments, so the taxability could not be determined without verification.

Conclusion: The issue was restored to the Assessing Officer for verification, leaving the matter open on merits.

Issue (vii): whether interest on income-tax refund was assessable as income from other sources.

Analysis: Interest on refund of taxes is not business income merely because the assessee carries on business. It is a distinct receipt arising from the statutory refund of excess tax.

Conclusion: The addition was sustained against the Assessee.

Issue (viii): whether corresponding book-profit adjustments under section 115JB were required.

Analysis: Book-profit computation must be aligned with the fate of the additions in the regular assessment, to the extent the same survive. Where a book entry has already been made and the regular computation is independent, no automatic duplicate adjustment is warranted.

Conclusion: The book-profit issue was remitted for recomputation in line with the final treatment of the related additions.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded on the principal substantive additions relating to notional interest and bad debts, failed on the refund-interest issue, and was otherwise remanded or restored for fresh verification and consequential recomputation, including under section 115JB.

Ratio Decidendi: RBI prudential norms governing income recognition and asset classification do not by themselves determine taxable income under the Income-tax Act; accrual and taxability must be tested on the facts under the Act, applying the real income principle and the relevant accounting and statutory provisions.

---