Commissioner Of Income Tax-Ii, Chandigarh v. M/S Punjab Energy Development Agency, Chandigarh

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Date of Decision: February 23, 2010 I.T.A. No. 57 of 2010 (Assessment Year 2003-04) Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Chandigarh …Appellant Versus M/s Punjab Energy Development Agency, Chandigarh …Respondent I.T.A. No. 58 of 2010(Assessment Year 2004-05) Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Chandigarh …Appellant Versus M/s Punjab Energy Development Agency, Chandigarh …Respondent CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present:Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Advocate,for the appellant.for the appellant. 1.To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2.Whether the judgment should be reported inthe Digest?the Digest? M.M. KUMAR, J. This order shall dispose of ITA Nos. 57 and 58 of 2010, whichhave been filed by the revenue under Section 260-A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for brevity, ‘the Act’) against the common order dated 24.6.2009,passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench ‘B’,Chandigarh, in ITA Nos. 302 and 303/Chd/2009, in respect of AssessmentYears 2003-04 and 2004-05 in the case of the assessee-respondent. Therevenue has raised the following questions of law for determination of thisCourt:- “(i).Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case,and in law the ITAT was correct in holding that the receiptsof grants-in-aid by the assessee from Central/State Govt.are not voluntary contributions for the purpose of section11 read with 12 of the Income Tax Act and are thus, notrequired to be taken into account as income of the assesseefor the purpose of ascertaining the amount expended or theamount to be accumulated? ii.Whether on the facts and the circumstances of the case, andin law the ITAT was right in holding interest income to beexempt under section 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961?” Learned counsel for the appellant at the outset very fairly states that both the aforesaid questions of law have already been answered by thisCourt against the revenue. Question No.1 has been answered against therevenue by this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax,Chandigarh-IIv. M/s Punjab State Sports Council(ITA No. 190 of 2008,decided on 12.12.2008). The second question has been decided against the-revenue by this Court in case ofCommissioner of Income Tax, ChandigarhIIv. M/s Punjab Energy Development Agency(ITA No. 666 of 2008, decided on 31.7.2009). The view taken in the aforementioned cases hasfurther been followed by a Division Bench of this Court in ITA No. 588 of2009 (Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Chandigarh v. M/s Punjab EnergyDevelopment Agency, Chandigarh), decided on 1.12.2009, which was filed bythe revenue against the order dated 29.4.2009 passed by the Tribunal in thecase of the assessee-respondent, in respect of Assessment Year 2005-06. In view of the aforesaid factual position, we find no merit in theseappeals as both the questions of law have already been decided against therevenue by this Court. Dismissed. A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of connected appeal. (M.M. KUMAR)JUDGE February 23, 2010 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) JUDGE Pkapoor