Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Commnr. Of Income Tax, Delhi-Iv vs M/S. Dalmia Promoters & Devels. (P) Ltd on 16 September, 2015
Bench: A.K. Sikri, Rohinton Fali Nariman
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 74/2007
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI-IV APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
M/S. DALMIA PROMOTERS & DEVELS.(P) LTD RESPONDENT(S)
O R D E R
By an assessment order dated 29th February, 1996, with regard to Assessment Year 1993-94 (with which we are concerned in the present case), the Assessing Officer held that interest earned from Fixed Deposits before business actually commenced would be taken under the head 'interest from other sources' and not under the head 'business income'. This was reversed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) by its order dated 4 th September, 1996 taking into account inter alia the fact that for the previous three assessment years the assessee for similar interest from such fixed deposits had been held to come within the head 'business income' and, therefore, following the principle of consistency, it was held that this would have to be for the Assessment Year 1993-94 as well. An appeal filed by the Revenue before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was dismissed on 1st October, 2004. Signature Not Verified
The Revenue not being Digitally signed by ASHWANI KUMAR Date: 2015.09.22 satisfied went to the High Court of Delhi under Section 260A of the 15:43:45 IST Reason:
Income Tax Act and vide judgment dated 17 th January, 2006 the appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed on the said same ground viz.that 2 for the previous three years such income would have to be treated as business income. There being no change in the circumstances for the Assessment Year 1993-94 the same result would, therefore, have to follow.
Shri Jaideep Gupta, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the Revenue has argued before us that in Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income-tax [227 ITR 172], this Court has held that in such a situation such income would have to be treated as interest from other source and not as business income. This is resisted by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the assessee.
We are not going into this issue inasmuch as this appeal can be disposed of on the ground that consistency does demand that there being no change in circumstances, the income for the year 1993-94 would also have to be treated business income as for the previous three years.
Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
......................J. [A.K. SIKRI] ......................J. [ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN] NEW DELHI;
SEPTEMBER 16, 2015.
3 ITEM NO.104 COURT NO.14 SECTION IIIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal No(s). 74/2007 COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX, DELHI-IV Appellant(s) VERSUS M/S. DALMIA PROMOTERS & DEVELS. (P) LTD Respondent(s)
Date : 16/09/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today. CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN For Appellant(s) Mr. Jaideep Gupta, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Rupesh Kumar, Adv.
Mr. T.M. Singh, Adv.
Mr. Pravesh Thakur, Adv. Mr. Jitin Singhal, Adv. Mr. B.K. Prasad, Adv.
Ms. Anil Katiyar, Adv.
Mr. B. V. Balaram Das,Adv.
For Respondent(s) Ms. Kavita Jha,Adv.
Ms. Roopali Gupta, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The civil appeal is dismissed in terms of the signed order.
(Ashwani Thakur) (Renu Diwan)
COURT MASTER COURT MASTER
(Signed Order is placed on the file)