Commissioner Of Income Tax-I, Ludhiana v. M/S Vardhman Polytex Limited, Chandigarh Road, Ludhiana

Income Tax Appeal No. 44 of 2004 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Income Tax Appeal No. 44 of 2004 Date of Decision: 21.01.2008 Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Ludhiana. …Appellant. VERSUS M/s Vardhman Polytex Limited, Chandigarh Road, Ludhiana. …Respondent. CORAM:HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOELHON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.KUMARHON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present:Mr. S.K.Garg Narwana, Advocatefor the appellant.for the appellant. Mr. M.S.Syali, Senior Advocate with Mr. Satyen Sethi, Mr. Akshay Bhan andMs. Mahua C. Kalra, Advocatesfor the respondent. RAJESH BINDAL, J. The revenue has approached this Court by filing the instant appealunder Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of In-come Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench 'B', Chandigarh, passedin I.T.A. No. 657/Chandi/97 and I.T.A. No. 710/Chandii/97 dated20.8.2003 in respect of assessment year 1993-94. It is claimed that thefollowing substantial question of law would arise for determination of thisCourt:- “Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, theHon’ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in delet-ing the addition of Rs. 1,03,93,864/- on account of interestby ignoring Explanation 8 to Section 43(1)?” For the detailed reasons stated in our separate judgment deliveredtoday in Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Ludhiana v. M/s VardhmanPolytex Limited, Chandigarh Road, Ludhiana I.T.A. No. 1 of 2003, thesubstantial question of law arising in the present appeal is answered infavour of the revenue and against the assessee. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. (Rajesh Bindal)Judge (Adarsh Kumar Goel)Judge January 21, 2008“DK” (M.M.Kumar)Judge