Commissioner Of Income Tax-7 v. M/S. Tracstar Investment Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.2020 OF 2010 Commissioner of Income Tax-7. ..Appellant. Vs. M/s. Tracstar Investment Ltd.,..Respondent. .... Mr. Suresh Kumar, for the Appellant. Mr. P.J. Pardiwala, Senior Counsel a/w. Mandar Vaidya i/b. Roy's Law Firm, for the Respondent. .... CORAM : J. P. DEVADHAR & A.R. JOSHI, JJ. th DECEMBER, 2011. DATED : 14 P.C. 1.Following questions of law are raised by the Revenue in this appeal. “a) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in deleting the disallowance made u/s. 14A of the I.T. Act of interest payment made u/s 14A of the IT Act ignoring the fact that the assessee had diverted its funds in investment of exempt income i.e. shars ? (b)Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in holding that for A.Y. 1999-2000 similar issue was involved which was deleted by the CIT(A) and the revenue has not filed any appeal before the ITAT against the CIT(A)'s order which is factually incorrect when the revenue has filed the appeal before the ITAT against the said order of the CIT(A) ? (c)Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the ITAT was justified in deleting the addition of Rs.1,82,000/- without considering the fact that the explanation to Section 73 of the IT Act, 1961 is squarely applicable in this case ? 2.As regards questions (a) & (b) are concerned, Counsel for the parties state that similar question raised by the Revenue in the assessee's own case i.e. Income Tax Appeal No.1822 of 2010 has been rejected by this Court on 20th July, 2011. For the reasons stated therein, questions (a) & (b) raised by the Revenue cannot be entertained. 3.As regards question (c) is concerned, Counsel for the parties state that similar question raised by the Revenue in assessee's own case i.e. Income Tax Appeal No.4929 of 2010 has been rejected by this Court today i.e. 14th December, 2011. Hence, question (c) also cannot be entertained. 4.In the result, the Appeal is dismissed. (A. R. JOSHI, J.) (J. P. DEVADHAR,J.)