Case Law Details
Hutchinson & Co. (India) P. Ltd. Vs DCIT (Karnataka High Court)
The issue under consideration is whether Tribunal is correct in the disallowing the claim of interest from the deposits without considering the terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties?
High Court states that, in view of aforesaid aspect of the matter, it is not necessary for us to examine on merits the substantial questions of law framed by a bench of this court. Admittedly, it is the contention of the assessee that under the relevant clauses of the agreement, the interest earned on capital bond was required to be paid to Prestige Holiday Resorts Company Ltd. However, the Tribunal while passing the impugned order has failed to consider the terms and conditions of the agreement. The impugned order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is therefore, set aside and the matter is remitted to the Tribunal for decision afresh in accordance with law pertaining to Assessment years 1997-98 to 2000-01, 2002-03 to 2004-05.
FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT ORDER /JUDGEMENT
This appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’, for short) has been preferred by the assessee. The subject matter of the appeal pertains to Assessment years 1997-98 to 2000-01 and 2003-04. The appeal was admitted by a Bench of this Court on 05.11.2012 to consider the following substantial questions of law:
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
