AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2011 (5) TMI 932
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sue raised is that Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 30,24,83,000/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of interest relating to relocation of industries. 3. At the outset, ld. counsel of the assessee submitted that this issue stands covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of assessee itself. The relevant portion of discussion on this account by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is as under:- "I have considered the submissions made by the authorized representative of the appellant company. This ground of appeal is covered not only by orders of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and ITAT but also of Hon'ble Delhi High Court....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in assessee's own case for earlier years. The relevant portion of discussion on this topic by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is as under:- "I have considered the submissions made by the authorized representative of the appellant company. Since the issue regarding maintenance charges stands covered by the orders of the ITAT in earlier years, wherein it has been held that the amount received by way of maintenance charges was actually received in trust for a specific purpose and though there was surplus in one year, there could be deficit in other years, I have no hesitation in respectfully following these orders on the issue at hand and direct the assessing officer to delete the addition of Rs. 0.60 lac made on this account.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n sanctioned to the appellant under the scheme titled 'Assistance to States for Development of Export Infrastructure' and other allied activities. The sanction orders also lay down the condition that the appellant would not incur any administrative expenditure out of the funds so allocated. The appellant has also provided copy of utilization certificate for the above mentioned total amount wherein it has been certified that the amount has been utilized for the purpose of setting up ASSYING - Hallmarking Centre and Gems and Jewellery Training Institute for which it was sanctioned and that there was no outstanding balance at the end of the year. The above facts clearly prove that the amount of Rs. 4.10 crores received by the appellant was cap....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e result, the Revenue's appeal stands dismissed. Assessee's appeal 15. The grounds raised in this regard read as under:- "That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was not justified in confirming addition of Rs. 2,57,55,508/- being interest on refund of income tax in respect of Relocation of Industries and CETP, being scheme of Delhi Government. That Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) having already decided vide ground no. 1 to the effect that there is no tax liability in respect of interest relating to relocation of industries and CETP and as such consequential refund and interest on same is also not chargeable to tax as same was due to Delhi Government." 16. On this issue,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....her interest on income tax refund, which is exigible to tax. the matter is not covered by the orders of Higher Appellate Authorities in the appellant's case as contended because the issue with in the appellant's case in earlier years was interest earned on the surplus funds of the schemes owned by the Delhi Administration and merely governed by the appellant. Here the issue is interest on income tax refund, which is chargeable to tax. The assessing officer has rightly added this amount to the income of the appellant and I uphold this action of the Assessing Officer. This ground of appeal is dismissed." 18. Against this order the Assessee is in appeal before us. 19. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the records. We fin....