bgp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1945 OF 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant Vs. M/s.Tancom Electronics ..Respondent Mrs.Padma Divakar for appellant. Mr.Parag Vyas for respondent. CORAM :- V.C.DAGA & J.P.DEVADHAR,JJ. DATE : 24TH NOVEMBER,2009 P.C. 1. Heard. Perused appeal. 2. This appeal is directed against the order dated 25th October, 2007. The question sought to be raised is only relates to whether the income of Rs.47,55,231/- received by the assessee being the interest income and treating the same as business income or income from other sources. The Tribunal was pleased to hold in favour of the assessee relying upon its own decision in the case of M/s.M.R.Bhansali & Co. Vs. DCIT in ITA No.2836/Mum/2004, wherein it was held that: “4. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the records. Though the assessee has raised several grounds of appeal, the main contention of the assessee is against the assessment of interest income under the head Income from other sources. This contention of the assesse is justified and supported by the decision of ITAT, Special Bench of Delhi Tribunal in Lalsons Enterprises Vs. DCIT (89 ITD 25) and Mumbai Bench of Tribunal in ITO Vs. Rama Exports in ITA No.3859/Mum/2001, which in-turn had relied on Third Member decision of DCIT Vs. Paramount Tading (98 ITD 77)(Del.). We, therefore, direct the Assessing Officer to reduce from gross interest receipts such interest as paid by the assessee on borrowings utilized for the purpose of earning interest income in question. The Assessing Officer is further directed to reduce 90% of net interest receipts, after nexus is proved, from the profits of business, while computing the deduction u/s.80-HHC of the Act. Thus, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.” 3. The finding of fact is recorded by the Tribunal that the income is derived from business activity and therefore, it a business income. The view taken by the Tribunal is a reasonable and possible view with which no fault can be found. No perversity could be demonstrated by the Learned Counsel for the Revenue in the impugned order. The appeal is without any substance, the same is dismissed for want of substantial question of law with no order as to costs. (J.P.DEVADHAR,J.) (V.C.DAGA,J.)