Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-4, Room v. M/S Sarda Energy & Minerals Ltd., 73-A, Central Avenue, Nagpur-18

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR TAXC No. 152 of 2018 Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4, Room No. 301, Saraf Chambers,Nagpur-01. Nagpur-01. ---- Appellant Versus M/s Sarda Energy & Minerals Ltd., 73-A, Central Avenue, Nagpur-18. ---- Respondent For Appellant :Ms. Naushina Afrin Ali, Advocate on behalf of Shri Amit Chaudhari, Senior Standing Counsel. Hon'ble Shri P. R. Ramachandra Menon, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu, JudgeOrder on Board Per P. R. Ramachandra Menon, Chief Justice 04.07.2019 1.The appeal is preferred at the instance of the Revenue. The substantialquestions of law suggested by the Appellant are reproduced below for easyreference: questions of law suggested by the Appellant are reproduced below for easyreference: “(i) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, in thecontext of sale of electricity by the power generating unit of theassessee to its Ferro alloy unit, the 'market value' as specifiedin section 80IA (8) of the I.T. Act, would be the same as the'sale price' of the State Electricity Board when the assesseecompany did not incur any transmission loss or administrativeor any other charge which the State Electricity Board has toincur for the same. (ii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, theexpenditure is hit by section 14A of the I.T. Act, in as much asthe divident received on such investments does not form part ofthe total income.” 2.We heard the matter and perused the records forming part of the proceedings. Ithas come to our notice that the issue involved herein was almost similar to theissue projected in several others matter such as Tax Case Nos. 31 of 2012, 32of 2012 and 34 of 2012. After considering the merit involved, final verdictpassed by this Court in the said matters on 02.08.2013, declaring that nosubstantial question of law was involved so as to invoke the jurisdiction underSection 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. It was accordingly, that the saidappeals were dismissed as devoid of any merits. has come to our notice that the issue involved herein was almost similar to theissue projected in several others matter such as Tax Case Nos. 31 of 2012, 32of 2012 and 34 of 2012. After considering the merit involved, final verdictpassed by this Court in the said matters on 02.08.2013, declaring that nosubstantial question of law was involved so as to invoke the jurisdiction underSection 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. It was accordingly, that the saidappeals were dismissed as devoid of any merits. 3.In the said circumstances, we find it appropriate to decline interference. Theappeal stands dismissed in terms of the verdict passed in Tax Case No. 31 of2012 and other connected matters. appeal stands dismissed in terms of the verdict passed in Tax Case No. 31 of2012 and other connected matters. Sd/- Sd/- (P. R. Ramachandra Menon)(Parth Prateem Sahu) Chief Justice Judge