Itxa-264-14.Doc v. M/S. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 264 OF 2014 Commissioner of Income Tax-2…Appellant v/s.Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd.…Respondent …. Mr. Suresh Kumar a/w Ms. Samiksha Kanani ,for the Appellant.Mr. Atul Jasani, for the Respondent. ….. CORAM : M.S. SANKLECHA &M.S. KARNIK, JJ. DATED : 15[th] July, 2016 P.C : 1.This appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,1961 (Act) challenges the order dated 30[th] April 2013, of the IncomeTax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal). The impugned order is in respectof Assessment Year 1999-2000. 2.The Appellate Revenue urges the following question of lawfor our consideration :- A.“Whether the activity of mere bottling of LPG gas into gascylinders amounts to production or manufacturing activityfor the purposes of Section 80HH/801/801A of the IncomeTax Act, 1961?”cylinders amounts to production or manufacturing activityfor the purposes of Section 80HH/801/801A of the IncomeTax Act, 1961?” Sameer Pg 1 of 2 914-ITXA-264-14.doc 3.We find that the impugned order of the Tribunal allowed theRespondent-Assessee's appeal holding that it is entitled to the benefitof Section 80HH and 80I/80IA of the Act, in respect of its LPG BottlingPlants by following the decision of this court dated 7[th] March 2013 inIncome Tax Appeal Lodging No. 2131 / 2012 (Commissioner ofIncome Tax Vs. M/s. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited). 4.Mr. Suresh Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the Revenuevery fairly states that the issue stands concluded against the Revenueby virtue of the decision in this Court in M/s. Hindustan PetroleumCorporation Limited (Supra). 5.In the above view, as it is a concluded issue, the question asframed does not give rise to any substantial question of law.Therefore, no entertained. 6.Accordingly, Appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs. (M.S. KARNIK J.) (M.S. SANKLECHA J.) Sameer Pg 2 of 2