ALICE ARUN THOMAS Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal challenges the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Cochin Bench a copy of which having been produced and marked on record as Annexure-C.

(2.) Sri.Anil D.Nair, learned senior counsel, instructed by Smt.G.Chitra appearing for the appellant, argued that the learned Tribunal has erred in not acceding to his client's claim for exemption under Sec. 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act (for short 'the Act') because, she has established, through cogent means, that the amount in question comprises of the interest that she derives on account of an investment. The learned senior counsel argued that the finding of the learned Tribunal, that his client's claim is hit by Sec. 37(1) of 'the Act' is untenable.

(3.) Sri.Jose Joseph learned standing counsel for the respondent, in response, argued that the facts of this case would establish ineluctably that what the appellant receives from the Firm - of which she is a partner, are profits, which cannot be construed as expenditure at the hands of the former; and hence that her claim under Sec. 36(1)(iii) of 'the Act' is misdirected and misconceived. He insisted that the learned Tribunal has acted without error and prayed that this appeal be dismissed.