TMI Blog2009 (3) TMI 496X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee. - 291 pf 2007 - - - Dated:- 17-3-2009 - PATNAIK A. K., SAPRE A. M. JJ JUDGMENT 1. This is an appeal under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short "the Act"). 2. The relevant facts briefly are that for the assessment year 2001-02, the respondent filed the return of income along with audit report under section 44AB showing a total income of Rs. 42,18,260. The Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, 4(1), Indore in his assessment order dated August 18, 2004, added inter alia a sum of Rs. 9,91,508 received by the respondent as interest on FDR. Along with other additions, the respondent was assessed to a total income of Rs. 57,68,420 and demand notice was issued accordingly. The respondent carried an appeal to th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... part of income from business and ought to have been shown as income from other sources. He further submitted that this court in the appeal for earlier assessment year in the very case of the respondent had held that interest earned by the respondent on FDR has to be treated as income from other sources and not income from business. 4. While we find full force in the submissions of Mr. Jain but we are not inclined to admit this appeal under section 260A of the Act, because an appeal under section 260A lies to the High Court from an order passed by the Appellate Tribunal only if the High Court is satisfied that the case involves a substantial question of law and in this case, we are not satisfied that it involves a substantial question of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ilal Mehta and M. Janardhana Rao cases (supra) to the facts of the present case, we find that the question whether the interest amount of Rs.9,91,508 received by the respondent on the FDR should have been shown by the respondent as income from business or income from other sources may be a question of law but is not a substantial question of law inasmuch as on the answer to the question, the appellant is not entitled to higher or lesser amount of tax from the respondent. As we have seen, the respondent was assessed to a taxable income of Rs. 57,68,420 in the assessment order and by giving effect to the addition of Rs. 9,91,508 received by the respondent as interest on FDR. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the Income-tax Appellat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
