- (1.) This appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act read with Section 21 of the Interest Tax Act is at the instance of an Assessee and is directed against an order dated April 26, 2004 passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, "A" Bench, Calcutta in Interest Tax Appeal No. 43(Kol.)/2003 for the Assessment Years 1997-98 and 1998-99 dismissing the appeal of the Appellant.
(2.) Being dissatisfied, the Assessee has come up with the present appeal.
(3.) The facts giving rise to filing of the present appeal may be summed up thus: a) The Assessee derives income from lease-rent, dividend, interest, brokerage and commission and for the Assessment Year 1997-98, the Appellant filed its return under the Interest Tax showing chargeable interest of Rs. 12,26,652/-. b) The Assessing Officer in computation of chargeable interest for the levy of the interest tax for the said period under Section 8(2) of the Interest Tax Act arrived at the figure of Rs. 32,36,080/- after addition of Rs. 20,09,431/- on account of bill discounting charge. c) Being dissatisfied, the Assessee preferred an appeal against the said order and one of the points taken in the appeal was that the Appellant was not at all chargeable to Interest Tax Act and due to mistake, the return was submitted under the said Act. d) The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), however, turned down such point and held that the Appellant was a Credit Institution within the meaning of Sections 2(5A) and 2(5B) of the said Act. The said appellate authority further turned down the claim of the Appellant that the income from brokerage and syndicate fees could not come within the purview of interest and thus, was not chargeable under the Interest Tax Act. The appeal filed by the Appellant was, thus, dismissed. e) Being dissatisfied, the Appellant preferred an appeal before the Tribunal below and by the order impugned herein, the said Court has affirmed those passed by the CIT (Appeals). f) A Division Bench of this Court at the time of admission of the present appeal formulated the following substantial questions of law: (I) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal erred in applying by implication the doctrine of estoppel against the Assessee's contention for immunity from the charge of Interest tax under the Interest Tax Act, 1974 and in declining to adjudicate on it merely for reason of the Assessee's merely for reason of the Assessee's acquiescence in taxation in the past. (II) Whether the Tribunal erred in holding that the recognition of the Assessee by the Reserve Bank of India as a Non-banking Financial Institution, renders it liable to the charge of interest tax, irrespective of the definition of a financial company under Section 2(5B). (III) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal should have held that the incomes of the Assessee by way of syndication fees and brokerages, are in the nature of professional income, not forming any part of chargeable interest for the purpose of taxation under the Interest Tax Act in the light of the provisions of Section 2(5B) (iv) read with Section 2(7) of the Interest Tax Act. (IV) If the answer is in the affirmative, whether the Assessee is at all liable to the charge of Interest Tax Act because those professional incomes constitute the principal components of the Assessee's total income by far exceeding 51% thereof.;