TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (7) TMI 521
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sment Years 2008-09 and 2010-11 respectfully. Since the grievances are common in both the years, both the appeals were heard together and are being disposed off by this common order for the sake of convenience brevity. 2. At the very outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee pointed out that identical issues were adjudicated by the Tribunal in assessee's own case for Assessment Years 2006-07 and 2007-08 in ITA Nos. 5705/DEL/2010 and 3284/DEL/2012 reported in 158 ITD 62. 3. It is the say of the ld. counsel for the assessee that in earlier Assessment Years, similar additions were deleted by the Tribunal and since the Revenue has not approached the Hon'ble High Court u/s 260A of the Act, the order of the Tribunal has attained finality....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....% i.e. Rs. 2,79,260 was assessable in the appellant's hands as "Income from other sources". 6. In ITA No. 3284/DEL/2012 for Assessment Year 2006-07, the grievances of the assessee read as under: "Ground No. 1 (i) Based on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in not allowing the exemption under Section 10(34) of the Act claimed by the appellant on its share of dividend income of Rs. 43,48,571 out of dividend income received by SARA Fund (venture capital Fund - VCF). (ii) Based on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in failing to appreciate that the companies from which SARA Fund had earned dividend had alre....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the appellant's share in the payment of Rs. 56,261,546 [176,000,GOO- 119,738,454] @ 22.73% i.e. Rs. 12,788,250/ was assessable in the appellant's hands as "Income from other sources". (iv) Based on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts, material evidence placed on record i.e. notes to the computation of income. Form 64 and audited Financial Statements of SARA Fund. (v) Based on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in not appreciating that in terms of the provisions of Section 115U(2) of the Act, the appellant could not provide or furnish information different from and/or conflicting with the statutory declaratio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cts, in disallowing expenses of Rs. 37,94,980 by taxing the share of the assessee in interest income from VCF under the head "Other Sources" on gross basis and not on net basis in disregard of the fact that income of a VCF can be passed on to its investors only after adjusting the expenses it incurred out of the funds provided by the investors, to earn such income. Ground No. 3 Based on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Assessing Officer has erred in law and on facts, in holding that the assessee's share in the amount of Rs. 51,60,098 [231,000.GOO- 225,839,902] @ 22.73% i.e. Rs. 11,72,890/ was assessable in the assessee's hands as "Income from other sources" 8. On a perusal of the above ground....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ome tax second time on the same income. Consequently, grounds No. 1(1) and 1(11) of I.T.A. No. 3284/Del/2012 and Ground No. l of I.T.A. No. 5705/Del/2010 are determined in favour of the assessee." 11. Respectfully following the order of the co-ordinate bench in Assessment Year 2006-07 [supra], we decide Ground No. 1in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. 12. Grievance raised vide Ground No. 2 has been considered by the co-ordinate bench in earlier Assessment Year at para 15 of its order and para 15.4 as under: "15.4 The issue in controversy is again required to be determined in consonance with the provisions contained u/s 115U discussed in the preceding paragraphs which mandates that venture capital compan....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....per book. Since there is no difference in the facts from earlier Assessment Years, respectfully following the findings of the co-ordinate bench, Ground No. 2 is also decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. 14. Grievance raised vide Ground No. 3 has also been considered by the co-ordinate bench in earlier Assessment Year at para 16 of its order [supra]. Relevant findings of the order read as under: "16.3 From the perusal of Form 64 and balance sheet / revenue account of SARA fund, it is proved that distribution of Rs. 17,60,00,000/- qua A.Y. 2006-07 and Rs. 11,72,890/- qua A.Y. 2007-08 was made to its beneficiaries as per the number of units purchased by each beneficiary, which fact is explained in the foot not....