TMI Blog2020 (11) TMI 649X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ried on by it, that it would not be correct to say that this interest was totally de hors the business carried on by it. It is well-settled that interest can be assessed under the head Income from other sources, only if it cannot be brought within one or the other of the specific heads of charge. In the case before us the interest income is clearly and justifiably assessed as business income. In short, the case under consideration is not a case of depositing unutilized and surplus money by the assessee to earn interest and, therefore, the interest earned by the assessee cannot be assessed as Income from other sources - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 444/Mum/2019 - - - Dated:- 18-11-2020 - SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT And ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed. 3. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. At the outset, we find that the facts of the assesee involved for the AY 2013-14 i.e the year under consideration are exactly identical with that facts prevailing in AY 2011-12 2012-13. We find that for the AY 2011-12, this Tribunal in assessee s own case in ITA NO. 5737/Mum/2015, dated 27/06/2018 had already adjudicated the very same issue in dispute before us and had dismissed the appeal of the revenue. For the sake of convenience, the entire order passed by this Tribunal for AY 2011-12, dated 27/06/2018 is reproduced hereunder:- Challenging the order dated 29/09/2016 of the CIT(A)-4, Mumbai, the Assessing Officer(AO) has filed present appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. Accordingly, he rejected the claim made by the assessee that the interest income from the fixed deposits should be treated as business income. 3. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the First Appellate Authority(FAA) and made detailed submissions. It also relied upon certain case laws. After considering the available material, he held that it was not a simple case where idle money was part fixed deposits and the assessee had earned income, that the idle money was made productive itself by investing, that assessee was an enterprise of government of India, that it was under direct control of the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, that the Government of India was 100% shareholder of the asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wed after taking into consideration the peculiar facts, that the entire advances received by it could not be immediately utilised, that the surplus amounts were temporarily parked with the bank, that the investment was not from other sources but from the main source i.e. Government of India and its various departments, that the AO had only presumed the nature of the income as interest income, that the relevant facts revealed that the advances received were for the purpose of funding media release and production of big films/short films, that the process of film production would undertake different stages and would be spread over for a longer period of time. He relied upon cases of Paramount Premium Ltd. (190 ITR 259), Lok Holdings (308 ITR ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bank resulting in accrual of interest income. We find that these basic finding of the FAA have not been challenged by the Department. It is also a fact that Government of India was 100% shareholder of the assessee-company and the deposit of advances with the banks was directly and inextricably linked with the business of the assessee, so the interest earned by it had to be treated as income earned from business and cannot not be treated as income from other sources. In other words, it can safely be held that the interest earned by the assessee was obviously attributable and incidental to the business carried on by it, that it would not be correct to say that this interest was totally de hors the business carried on by it. It is well-settled ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... before us, the assessee is carrying on business of film production from its inception. Advances were received by assessee in its normal course of business. Similar is the case of Tuticorin Alkali. In short, both the cases do not deal with the facts of the present case. So, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we hold that the order of the FAA does not suffer from any legal or factual infirmity and that it does not require any interference from our side. Effective ground of appeal is decided against the AO. As a result, appeal filed by the AO stands dismissed. 4. Similar order has been passed by this Tribunal for AY 2012-13 in ITA No. 5956/Mum/2017 in assessee s own case, dated 17/05/2019 wherein the appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
