2010 (4) TMI 1154

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... PER SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of ldCIT(A) dated 3.11.2009 and pertains to A.Y. 2006-07. 2. The issue raised is that the ldCIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 22,66,693/- made on account of interest earned on infrastructure development fund. 3. In this case the assessee is a local authority engaged in the work of d....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ommittee, payments are made. In the same way interest earned from such fund does not relate to Saharanpur Development Authority and is thus, not a part of income of Saharanpur Development Authority. The AO did not accept these contentions and made addition of Rs. 22,66,693/-. 4. Upon assessee's appeal the ldCIT(A) noted the assesee submissions that on identical issue in the A.Y. 2004-05 the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the funds. More so AO has not brought to tax the principle amount as income of the assesee. If his logic is accepted then all the fees etc. over and above the expenditure ought to have been examined as income of the assessee....................". Finding the facts of the case identical the ldCIT(A) deleted the addition following the ratio from the ITAT order for A.Y. 2004-05. 5. Against thi....