Itxa/1668/2012 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central - Ii v. M/S. Hardware Engineers And Builders Pvt.ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1668 OF 2012 … Commissioner of Income Tax-II ...Appellant v/s. M/s.Haware Engineers & Builders Pvt.Ltd. ...Respondent … Mr.Ashok Kotangale with Mr.Arun D.Nagarjun i/b Ms.Padma Diverkar for the Appellant.Mr.Mihir Naniwadekar for the Respondent. ... CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI & A.A. SAYED, JJ. DATED : 4 DECEMBER 2014 P.C. Having heard Mr.Kotangale in support of the Appeal and Mr.Naniwadekar appearing on behalf of the Assessee, we are of the opinion that all the three questions and which have been framed by the Revenue and set out at pages 6 & 7 of the Paper Book are not substantial questions of law. 2. The order dated 4 May 2012, from which this Appeal arises, considers the deduction under section 80IB(10) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In Income Tax Appeal No.201 of 2012 (Commissioner of Income Tax-16 v/s. M/s.Happy Home Enterprises) decided on 19 September 2014, the Division Bench of this Court, to which one of us (S.C.Dharmadhikari, J.) is a party, has dealt with all itxa-1668-12.doc three questions. It is not disputed that the questions are answered in favour of the Assessee and against the Revenue. 3.In these circumstances questions 6.1 & 6.2 stand fully covered by that judgment. 4.As far as question 6.3 is concerned, in the light of factual conclusion of the Tribunal and which is to be found at para 33 of the Tribunal's order, it is apparent that if other project styled as “Tulsi” is part or extension of Vrindavan Project, then, Vrindavan Project is entitled to the benefit and deduction under section 80IB(10), Tulsi Project will also be entitled for the same. 5.In such circumstances, any wider question or controversy does not arise for determination in the peculiar facts. All the three questions, therefore, stand answered already against the Revenue and in favour of the Assessee by the Division Bench of this Court. The Appeal does not raise any substantial question of law. It is, therefore, dismissed. No costs. (A.A. SAYED, J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI,J.)