TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (1) TMI 1106
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. On the facts & circumstances of the case the Learned Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) has erred in directing the Assessing Officer to treat the sum of INR 7,48,970/- under the head Income from other sources instead of business income. The appellant prays that the conclusion reached by the Assessing Officer (AO) as directed by Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) are erroneous and shall be deleted. 2. On the facts & circumstances of the case, the appellant prays that the sum of INR 7,48,970/- may be reduced from the total value of capital work in progress, as the said income is in the nature of capital receipt and the same shall not be taxed under the head "Income from other sources". 3....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ncome from Other Sources". The assessee filed its reply dated 15.12.2017 and contended that the assessee obtained credit facilities from various banks and Institutions for setting up of infrastructure facility. The funds are exclusively meant for use of setting up of infrastructure facility. The lenders disbursed the funds at specified intervals and are required for the purpose of setting up of the project. However, due to time difference and source and application of funds, the assessee invested in short term deposit and earned interest. On maturity, the funds were ultimately used for the purpose of project. The intention of assessee of parking the funds by way of Fixed Deposit for short period is to utilize the funds for maximizing the re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... and in Jorabat Shillong Expressway Ltd. Vs. ITO in ITA No. 6695/Mum/2017 for Assessment Year 2012-13 dated 24.07.2019. 5. On the other hand, the ld. DR for the revenue supported the order of lower authorities. The ld. DR further submits that the assessee before the ld. DRP has taken stand that the assessee has a liability of interest and the amount was parked in a Fixed Deposit to meet out the interest liability. In support of his submission, the ld. AR of the assessee relied upon the decision of Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. Vs. CIT (227 ITR 172) (SC). 6. In rejoinder submission, the ld. AR of the assessee submits that the assessee availed the credit facility from the Banks and various Institutions. There was compulsio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at Power Consortium vs. ITO (355 ITR 255(Del.), CIT vs. Facor Power Ltd. [2016] taxman.com 178 (Del.). Therefore, considering the decision of Tribunal in assessee's own case for Assessment Year 2011- 12 and respectfully following the same, Ground No.1 to 3 of appeal are allowed. 8. Further, we have noted that in case of Jorabat Shillong Expressway Ltd. For Assessment Year 2010-11, which was followed in Assessment Year 2012-13 (supra), the co-ordinate bench of Tribunal referred and relied upon the decision of Indian Oil Panipat Consortium Ltd. (315 ITR 255 (Delhi High Court) wherein the decision of Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. (supra) was considered and distinguished. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court held that in Tuticorin Alk....