TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 1859X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r Shri Vishal Mohan. For the Respondent : Shri Manjit Singh. ORDER Per Bhavnesh Saini, JM This appeal by assessee has been directed against order of ld. CIT(Appeals) Shimla dated 04.03.2016 for assessment years 2012-13 on the following ground : That in the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld Commissioner of Income Tax ( Appeals) is not justified in upholding the addition of ₹ 9,46,51,086/- made to the taxable income of the assessee by treating the interest accrued on FDR's as income from other sources and subjecting the same for taxation . Fact of the matter is that the' assessee's business was in a pre-operational stage and the interest had been rightly reduced from the capital work in pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessment year. The assessee company had earned interest income of ₹ 9,46,51,086/- in the assessment year 20l2-13. The interest was earned on surplus funds available with the assessee company. This fact was duly noted by the Statutory Auditors of the assessee company in their Audit Report dated 26.10.2012. The statutory auditors commented on the accounting policies as under : Tax on income for the current period is determined on the basis of various judgments of Hon'ble Courts that income earned during construction period is not taxable and accordingly no current tax liability is determined. 3. The auditors further in para (E)(ii) of their Auditor's Reports has categorically mentioned about the change of accountin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the assessee was not found satisfactory and after elaborate discussion and relying on judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals fertilizers Ltd. Vs. CIT (1997) 227 ITR 172 (SC) Apex Court, made in the assessment order, the A.O. held that the gross interest earned by assessee was assessable under the head income from other sources. Therefore, it was concluded that interest of ₹ 9,46,51,086/-was assessable in the hands of HPPTCL for Assessment Year 2012-13 as income from the other sources. Aggrieved by the same, assessee filed appeal. 4. The assessee challenged the order of the Assessing Officer before ld. CIT(Appeals) and his submissions are reproduced in the appellate order. The ld. CIT(Appeals) n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
