TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (12) TMI 988
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nst the order dated 20-08-2014 passed by Ld. CIT(A)-20, Mumbai and it relates to the assessment year 2010-11. The assessee is aggrieved by the decision of Ld. CIT(A) in upholding the assessment of interest receipts under the head Income from other sources as against the claim of the assessee to assess the same under the head Income from business. The assessee is also aggrieved by the decision of Ld. CIT(A) in confirming disallowance of various expenses claimed by the assessee. 2. We heard the parties and perused the record. The assessee is engaged in the business of investment into financial instruments, mutual funds etc. The assessee received interest income and miscellaneous income as detailed below during the year under consideration:- Interest on income tax refund - 18,87,297 Interest on deposits with Bank - 7,47,260 Interest on deposits/ICD with corporate - 33,97,892 Interest received from a concern - 10,421 ----------------- 60,42,870 ========== The assessee offered the above said interest income under the head Business. The assessing officer noticed that the assessee's application for getting status of "Non-Ban....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....see has been earning income of identical nature in the past and the assessing officer has assessed the same under the head Income from business. Even though the principle of res judicata is not applicable to the income tax proceedings, yet we notice that the tax authorities have not given any reason as to why the decision taken on identical issue in the earlier years should not be followed. Hence we are of the view that the Ld. A.R. was justified in contending that the principle of consistency should be followed in the year under consideration. The deposits made with the banks and corporate, in our view, can be considered as part of business activities of the assessee as it is engaged in the business of investing in financial instruments. 6.1. It is a fact that the RBI has rejected its application for NBFC status. In this regard, we may notice that the co-ordinate bench has already taken a view in the case of Preimus Investment and Finance Ltd (supra) that the said fact does not determine the nature of income. Accordingly the said reason given by the tax authorities also fails. 7. At the time of hearing, the ld. A.R. fairly admitted that the interest on income tax....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 98). Thereafter, during the year, out of deposit of Rs. (sic)},25,W,000/- BPT adjusted Rs. 87,69,150/- towards lease rent and interest thereon of Rs. 39,69,999/- (including TDS of Rs. 3,60,909/-. We are enclosing herewith copy of adjustment letter received from BPT and ledger account of interest paid to BPT, same was claimed as deduction while computing the business income. Without prejudice to above, even if rental income from Marico is taxable wider the head "Income from Other Sources" the assessee is entitled for deduction for rent and interest paid to BPT from the said rental income." The submissions of the assessee have been duly considered. It is not in dispute that the rental Income(Occupancy charges") earned by the assessee from Marico is taxable as "Income from Other Sources", This has been confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) and the assessee has not taken re matter to the Hon'ble ITAT, Thus, it has also, accepted that the rental income is not taxable the head Business Income. Further, it did not raise a ground before the Hon'ble ITAT that this interest expenditure on rent be allowed against the occupancy charges. The Hon'ble ITAT has the undersigned to exami....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....3B items] 7,32,250/- Repairs to Building 12,66,795/- Electricity charges 54,003/- Auditors Remuneration 8,39,147/- Interest on delayed payment of rent to Bombay Port Trust 36,09,090/- Legal & Professional charges 4,84,291/- Miscellaneous Expenses 3,12,946/- Security charges 2,07,202/- Communication expenses 61,056/- Traveling, conveyance & vehicle expenses 53,376/- Bank charges 1,405/- Depreciation (as per Income Tax) 1,14,751/- Total 77,36,312/- The aforesaid expenses ought to be allowed while computing the income of the assessee under the head "Income from Business or profession" or under the head 'Income from other sources'. 8. From the above, it is clear that this issue was very much before this tribunal and the tribunal had remanded the matter to examine all the expenses, which were raised in ground, which included this claim. The authorities below have clearly erred in holding that ITAT has not remanded this issue. The ITAT in concluding portion has clearly mention that various expenses claimed by the assessee require examination at the end of AO. In the present case, we note that a....