Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2006 (11) TMI 151

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... section 80HHC and also under section 32AB of the Income-tax Act. The assessment was completed vide order dated March 18, 1993, whereby the Assessing Officer disallowed the claim of the appellant under section 80HHC on the interpretation of rule 8(1). The full deduction under section 32AB was also disallowed. Feeling aggrieved, the appellant-company approached the Commissioner of Income-tax by preferring an appeal and the appellate authority granted both the reliefs to the appellant, whereupon the Revenue approached the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Guwahati Bench, in I.T.A. No. 22/Gauhati of 1996. The learned Tribunal allowed the appeal of the Income-tax Department and remitted back the same to the Assessing Officer with the direction t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... in the business and accordingly, the interest income was excluded from the gross receipt. The appellate authority did not agree with the assessing authority as regards the application of section 32AB and held that all the incomes of the appellant-company arose in the normal course of carrying on the business of the said company and therefore form a part of the appellant's business income. Although they have been shown and classified under different heads of income, they continue to be income arising out of the business of the company and accordingly, directed the assessing authority to include the interest income, dividend income and other income in the profits of the eligible business income while computing the deduction available to the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ts that in the present case, there is nothing to show that the business of investment in shares, lending money for interest and manufacture and sale of the tea business are not common in nature and both the businesses are not intertwined and interlaced as was the case in Apollo Tyres [2002] 255 ITR 273 (SC). The matter was examined by the appellate authority and the following observations are pertinent: "The income from interest is part and parcel of our tea business. The fact that the company's activities gave rise to interest and sundry receipts does not detract from the facts that the company's business remains what it is and has always been i.e., growing, manufacturing and sale of tea. The said activities did not constitute a separate .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates