https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308386 Interest on surplus funds was held taxable as income from other sources because binding precedent was conclusive against the Revenue, so that issue was decided in favour of the assessee. The provision for retirement benefits was held not allowable as a deduction under section 37 because prior precedent had already decided the point against the assessee, so that issue was decided in favour of the Revenue. As both questions were covered by binding precedent, no substantial question of law arose under section 260A and the appeal was dismissed. en-us Tue, 15 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 21 Jun 2023 20:35:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308386 Interest on surplus funds was held taxable as income from other sources because binding precedent was conclusive against the Revenue, so that issue was decided in favour of the assessee. The provision for retirement benefits was held not allowable as a deduction under section 37 because prior precedent had already decided the point against the assessee, so that issue was decided in favour of the Revenue. As both questions were covered by binding precedent, no substantial question of law arose under section 260A and the appeal was dismissed. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 15 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308386