https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210461 HC upheld the Tribunal's finding that dividend on redeemable preference shares, interest on bank deposits/FDs, service charges on SDF loans, miscellaneous receipts and interest on employee loans, though attributable to the long-term finance business, were not "derived from" such business for deduction under Section 36(1)(viii). No substantial question of law arose and the assessee's claim for enhanced deduction failed. The HC further held that reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 148 within four years were valid. Exercising jurisdiction under Section 263, the CIT rightly revised the assessment as it was erroneous for ignoring the amendment to Section 36(1)(viii) introduced by the Finance Act, 1985. en-us Mon, 28 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 11 Dec 2025 13:10:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210461 HC upheld the Tribunal's finding that dividend on redeemable preference shares, interest on bank deposits/FDs, service charges on SDF loans, miscellaneous receipts and interest on employee loans, though attributable to the long-term finance business, were not "derived from" such business for deduction under Section 36(1)(viii). No substantial question of law arose and the assessee's claim for enhanced deduction failed. The HC further held that reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 148 within four years were valid. Exercising jurisdiction under Section 263, the CIT rightly revised the assessment as it was erroneous for ignoring the amendment to Section 36(1)(viii) introduced by the Finance Act, 1985. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 28 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210461