Ita/45/2004 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S Vardhman Spinning And Gen Mills Ltd

ITA No. 45 of 2004 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT QORKR PUNJAB AND HARYANA.AT CHANDIGARH ITA No. 45 of 2004 (O&M) Date of Decision: 29.03.2016 Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Ludhiana ....... Appellant +",%-% M/s Vardhman Spinning and General Mills Ltd. ...... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDALHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARINDER SINGH SIDHU Present:Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Advocatefor the appellant. RAJESH BINDAL,J. This appeal has been filed under Section 260 A of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act’), against the order dated30.7.2003 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ChandigarhBench (B), in ITA Nos.712/CHANDI/97 and 658/CHANDI/97, forthe assessment year 1992-93 raising the following substantialquestions of law: (i) (a) Whether in view of the circumstances andfacts of the case, the Hon'ble Income Tax AppellateTribunal erred in confirming the order of theCommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) on accountof deduction on front end fee though thisexpenditure pertaining the period _ befocommencement of commercial production?(b) Whether this expenditure is not a capitalexpenditure? ITA No. 45 of 2004 (O&M)-)| (ii) Whether, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal iscorrect in ignoring the expenditure incurred forearning the Dividend Income, while allowing reliefu/s 80-M without examining the fact that suchexpenditure was actually incurred to earn dividendincome which was liable to be considered fordeduction u/s 80-M2 Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue submitted thatin view of circular No21/2015 dated 10.12.2015 read with circularNo.279/Misc/M-142/2007-ITJ (Part) dated 8.3.2016, issued by CentralBoard of Direct Taxes, he does not wish to press the present appeal, asthe tax effect involved is less than ©|20 lacs. However, he prays thatliberty be granted to the revenue to file an application for revival of theappeal in case something survives therein, Dismissed as not pressed with liberty as prayed for. It ishowever, clarified that withdrawal of the appeal by the revenue shallnot be taken as affirmation of order of the Tribunal on merits. Thelegal issue as claimed by the revenue is left open to be adjudicated inan appropriate case, (RAJESH BINDAL)JUDGE 29.03.2016TEe M (HARINDER SINGH SIDHU)JUDGE