TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (1) TMI 108
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s. For the assessment Year 1998-99, the return of income was filed by the assessee. The Assessing office passed an order under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act on 22.1.2001 and made an addition of Rs. 9,86,430/. Against the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax. The CIT(A) partly allowed the said appeal . 2.1. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order of the CITA, the revenue has filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal vide order dated 06.02.2006 allowed the appeal of the revenue. Hence, this appeal is filed at the instance of the assessee. 3. While admitting this appeal on 21.06.2007, the Court had formulated the following substantial qu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ired to be borne in mind. The interest from Bajaj Institution has direct nexus with the business and therefore the interest is required to be considered as derived from business. Question no. 2 is therefore answered in the affirmative i.e. in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. 9. So far as the question raised in Tax Appeal No. 187 of 2003 is concerned, the issue is squarely covered by the decision of this Court Tax Appeal No. 257 of 2000 with Tax Appeal No. 256 of 2000 as well as the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Karnal Cooperative Sugar Mills Ltd (supra). The Apex Court in the case of Karnal Cooperative Sugar Mills Ltd (supra) has obser....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ry. In short, the assessee contended that such income cannot be treated as income from other sources, but must be seen as part of the assessee's business income. 15. In view of the exercise already undertaken by the Delhi High Court in the case of Jaypee DSC Ventures Ltd (supra), we may not separately refer to in detail the facts and ratio of the various decisions of the Supreme Court, noted above. Suffice it to conclude, in the present case also, the assessee was compelled to park a part of its funds in fixed deposits under the insistence of the financial institutions. On such funds, the assessee received interest. Such income cannot be treated as income from other sources and must be seen as....