TMI Blog2008 (5) TMI 198X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iala, learned counsel for the appellant. Heard Mr. R. L. Sood, learned senior advocate, for the respondent. 2. The present appeal under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act"), has been preferred against the order dated October 29, 1999, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh (in short "the ITAT"), in I. T. A. No. 999/Chandi/92. 3. It appears the assessee filed return for the assessment year 1989-90 which was assessed on August 24, 1999, by the Income-tax Officer thereby assessing interest on short-term deposits received by the assessee as income from other sources and assessed the assessment under section 56 of the Act. As such the interest of Rs. 3,09,586 received during the period was assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i/92 against the above order of the Commissioner (Appeals) which too was dismissed affirming the verdict of the Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) indicating that the assessee had correctly made the claim and the amount of Rs. 3,09,586 received as interest could not be treated as income from other sources. 6. In the facts and circumstances the appeal under section 260A of the Act has been preferred by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Shimla on the following substantial question of law: "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee had correctly claimed adjustment and that amount of Rs. 3,09,586 received as interest could not be treated as income fr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2001] 248 ITR 110, substantial question of law has to be dealt with. 9. On the other hand, Mr. R. L. Sood, learned senior advocate, appearing on behalf of the respondent has urged that while managing the affairs of the business of the respondent organization, many unexplained expenditure verifiable from the records may be highlighted for which the assessing authority may make verification and may pass a fresh order evaluating the benefit of those claims to be brought by the respondent afresh. 10. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the documents. 11. In view of the settled position of law, we are of the considered view that the submissions of learned counsel for the respondent are unacceptable as the i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
