https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400417 The Tribunal remitted the case back to the AO for fresh adjudication, focusing on the classification of interest income on FDR and Flexi deposits as either revenue or capital receipts. It directed the AO to assess whether the interest income was used for revenue purposes or capital expenditure. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision regarding the treatment of interest on mobilization advances as capital receipts for the assessment year 2014-2015. It emphasized adherence to the principle of consistency only when circumstances remain unchanged and instructed the AO to provide the assessee a reasonable opportunity to be heard. Appeals were allowed for statistical purposes. en-us Tue, 03 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 05 Nov 2024 11:30:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400417 The Tribunal remitted the case back to the AO for fresh adjudication, focusing on the classification of interest income on FDR and Flexi deposits as either revenue or capital receipts. It directed the AO to assess whether the interest income was used for revenue purposes or capital expenditure. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision regarding the treatment of interest on mobilization advances as capital receipts for the assessment year 2014-2015. It emphasized adherence to the principle of consistency only when circumstances remain unchanged and instructed the AO to provide the assessee a reasonable opportunity to be heard. Appeals were allowed for statistical purposes. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 03 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400417