Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

6. The Assessing Officer had included the interest income of Rs.49,63,64,631/- received from investment in FDRs in RGCTP Fund as taxable in the hands of the assessee.

7. The brief facts as noted b y the CIT (Appeals) in relation to ground No.1 raised by the assessee are as under:

"3.1 Brief facts on the issue are that the appellant had not offered the interest income from some of the FDRs for taxation and when the Assessing Officer questioned, the appellant had explained that since the funds of thee FDRs belonged to Chandigarh Administration, the interest income also belonged to them. Out of the total amount of interest not offered for taxation of Rs.50,27,91,010/-, interest income amounting to Rs.49,63,64,631/- relates to RGCTP FDRS and the balance of Rs.64,26,379/- pertains to funds relating to conversion fee on account of conversion of industrial plots to commercial plots. The appellant has filed a written submission in the appellate proceedings."

9. We find that the present issue has arisen in the case of the assessee i t s e l f i n a s s e s s m e n t ye a r s 2 0 0 7 - 0 8 a n d 2 0 0 8 - 0 9 . The Tribunal in ITA N o . 1 0 7 5 / C h d / 2 0 1 0 a n d I T A N o . 1 1 9 8 / C h d / 2 0 1 0 f o r a s s e s s m e n t ye a r 2 0 0 7 - 08 held as under:

" 44. The Id. CIT(A) has dealt with the aforesaid issue in para 32 and 33 of her Order as under:

"32. The issue involved in this ground is as to whether interest income of Rs.9,01,57,799/- on FDR created from funds received from RGCTP Habitat Project and conversion of industrial Plots to Commercial Plots belong to the Chandigarh Administration or the appellant. The appellant submitted that a sum of Rs.7,04,29,365/- was bank interest that accrued on the funds generated from the RGCTP Habitat Project and balance Rs.1,97,28,435/- was accrued on the funds that related to conversion fee on account of conversion of Industrial Plots to Commercial Plots.

11. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal :

"1 On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.64,26,379/- which was made by the AO on account of accrued interest on the funds relating to conversion fee.

2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the disallowance of Rs.75,21,032/- and in not treating the expenditure of Rs.96,66,894/- as capital expenditure though it was incurred on computerization of office yielding enduring benefits to the assessee."