The Tribunal is bound by judicial discipline to follow its own coordinate bench decisions regarding the capital nature of interest income on fixed deposits when the facts for the current assessment year remain identical to those in previous years for which the law was settled.

आदेश / O R D E R

Per Bench:

ITA No.519/CTK/2025 is an appeal filed by the revenue against the order of CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi in Appeal No.CIT(A), Bhubaneswar-1/14730/2019-20 order dated 03/07/2025 for the assessment year 2017-18 and C.O No.02/CTK/2026 is a cross objection filed by the assessee in revenue’s appeal in ITA No.519/CTK/2025.

2. Shri B. K. Mahapatra, AR appeared on behalf of the assessee and Shri Jeetendra Kumar, CIT-DR represented on behalf of the revenue.

3. In the revenue’s appeal, the revenue has filed the following grounds of appeal:

GROUNDS OF APPEAL

1. Weather in facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A) is right in law to DLEETE the addition made on account of interest income from bank to the taxable income u/s 56 of the I.T. Act.

2. On the similar issue for A/Y: 2015-16, the assessee opted for Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme under DTVSV Act 2024. Hence, it is evident that the assessee has accepted the addition made towards interest income on Fixed Deposits. So, on this issue the department had filed appeal before Hon'ble High Court on the ground of merit/substantial question of law. However, the Hon'ble Supreme Court dismissed the appeal of the Department on the ground of delay not on the ground of merit/substantial question of law. So, the ground of merit still remains open. The Department has not accepted the ITAT order dated 21/06/2022 for the A/Y: 2015-16 in higher judicial forum. It means the same issue for current assessment

4. It was submitted by the ld. CIT-DR that the assessee has not started its business and the capital funds of the assessee kept in fixed deposits and interests have been earned. It was the submission that in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals ft Fertilizers Ltd. v. CIT reported in 227 ITR 1 72 (SC), the interest income is liable to be assessed under the head from other sources in the hands of the assessee. It was the submission that the ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the additions.

5. In reply, the ld. AR submitted that the issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the assessee’s own case for the assessment year 2008-09 in ITA No.462/CTK/2011 and for the assessment year 2009-10 in ITA No.401/CTK/2013 dated 27.06.2014. It was the submission that the ld. CIT(A) in para 5.3.1 to 5.3.4 of his order has followed the decision of the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the assessee’s own case for assessment year 2008-09 and has held that the interest on FDs is a capital receipt and has deleted the addition. The ld. AR further drew our attention to the grounds of appeal raised by the revenue. It was the submission that a perusal of the grounds of appeal raised by the revenue shows that the revenue has also lost appeals for the earlier years before the Hon’ble High Court and the Hon’ble Supreme Court. In regard to the ground raised by the revenue for assessment year 2015-16, the assessee has obtained VSV scheme and it was the submission that for the assessment year 2015-16, what was obtained udder VSV scheme was a complete different issue and also different proceedings and not the issue in respect of interest income on fixed deposits.

6. We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the facts in the present case clearly shows that the ld. CIT(A) in his order in paras 5.3 to 5.3.5 has followed the judicial discipline and followed the decision of the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal for the assessment year 2008-09 to delete the addition. The revenue has not able to produce any facts which are different for the impugned year from the facts as are available for assessment year 2008-09. This being so, we do not find any reaso