TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Judgment allows interest income deduction on FDRs under section 80-IA</h1> <h3>Ramakrishna Industries, Hyderabad Versus The DCIT, Circle-15 (1), Hyderabad</h3> Ramakrishna Industries, Hyderabad Versus The DCIT, Circle-15 (1), Hyderabad - TMI Issues involved:The judgment involves issues related to interest income on Fixed Deposit Receipts (FDRs), disallowance of expenditure under section 37 of the Income Tax Act, and disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act.Interest on FDRs:The assessee, engaged in the business of power generation and sale, earned interest income on FDRs during the relevant financial year. The Assessing Officer categorized this interest as 'income from other sources' instead of business income. The CIT(A) upheld this categorization, stating lack of material to interfere with the AO's decision. The AR argued citing precedents that interest on FDRs in a bank should be considered as profits derived from any business of an industrial undertaking. The Bombay High Court's decisions supported this argument, emphasizing the distinction between 'profits and gains derived from an industrial undertaking' and 'profits and gains derived from any business of the industrial undertaking.' Following these precedents, the interest income on FDRs was allowed as a deduction under section 80-IA of the Act.Disallowance of Expenditure under Section 37 and 40(a)(ia):The appeal also addressed the disallowance of expenditure under sections 37 and 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The assessee submitted property tax receipts and proof of TDS remittance before the CIT(A), which were not considered in the impugned order. The Tribunal admitted additional evidence of property tax receipts and directed the Assessing Officer to verify the material and take a view on the disallowance issues under sections 37 and 40(a)(ia). The grounds were treated as allowed for statistical purposes, and the appeal was partly allowed.Conclusion:The judgment addressed the classification of interest income on FDRs, ruling in favor of the assessee based on precedents establishing such income as business profits. It also dealt with the disallowance of expenditure under sections 37 and 40(a)(ia), directing verification of submitted material by the Assessing Officer. The appeal was partly allowed, with the issues remanded for further assessment.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
