Commissioner Of Income Tax-Ii v. Order

Sharayu Khot. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 636 OF 2015 Commissioner of Income Tax-II …Appellant Versus M/s. Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Seva) Ltd.…Respondent ---------- Mr. Ashok Kotangle, a/w Ms. Padma Divakar, for the Appellant.Mr. Vipul Joshi, for the Respondent. ---------- CORAM :M.S. SANKLECHA &RIYAZ I. CHAGLA, JJ. DATE : 9 January 2018 ORDER : 1.This Appeal under Section 260-A of the Income TaxAct, 1961 (“The Act” for short), challenges the order dated 18November 2014 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal 1/3 12-ITXA-636-15.doc (“The Tribunal” for short). The impugned order dated 18November 2014 is in respect of Assessment Year 2009-10. 2.The Revenue has urged the following question oflaw for our consideration:- “Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT was justified in law in holdingthat the assessee is entitled for deduction underSection 80IA(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 eventhough the activities undertaken by the assessee donot fall within clause (d) of the Explanation toSection 80IA(4) defining the term infrastructurefacilities?” 3.By the impugned order dated 18 November 2014,the Tribunal has dismissed the Appeal by following its decisiondated 31 August 2012 in respect of some Respondent-Assesseefor the assessment year 2008-09. 2/3 12-ITXA-636-15.doc 4.Mr. Kotangale, the learned Counsel for the Revenuevery fairly states that the Appeal from the order of the Tribunalfor the assessment year 2008-09 to this Court was dismissed on April 21, 2015 reported in Commissioner of Income-Tax Vs.Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd.[1] 5.In view of the above, the question as framed doesnot give rise to any substantial question of law. Thus, thisAppeal is not entertained. 6.Accordingly, Appeal dismissed. No order as to costs. [RIYAZ I. CHAGLA J.] [M.S. SANKLECHA, J.] 1 (2015) 374 ITR 645 (Bom.) 3/3