Itxa/4245/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-2, Mumbai v. M/S Secksaria Biswan Sugar Factory Ltd

AGK IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.1269 OF 2007 The Commissioner of Income- tax - 2, Mumbai ..Appellant. V/s. M/s.Seksaria Biswan Sugar Factory Limited ..Respondent. Mr.P.S. Sahadevan for the appellant. Mr.Y.P. Trivedi & Mr.Pankaj Toprani i/by Usha Dalal for the respondent. CORAM : V.C. DAGA & J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 7TH MAY, 2009. P.C. : 1. Heard learned counsel for rival parties. In this appeal, following question of law is sought to be raised. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the ITAT is correct in allowing deduction in respect of incentive on free sale of sugar as revenue receipt of Rs.4.53 crores, and disallowance of interest expenses u/s.14A to dividend income ? 2. The learned counsel for the respondent states that the second part of the question with regard to disallowance of interest expenses u/s. 14A to dividend income would not arise because the finding in this behalf is already recorded by the tribunal in favour of the revenue. Consequently, the revenue could not be said to be aggrieved party so far as second part of the question is concerned. 3. So far as first part of the question is concerned relating to the deduction in respect of incentive on free sale of sugar as revenue receipt is concerned, the same is covered by the judgment of Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT V/s. Balrampur Chinni Mills reported in 238 ITR 445, against which Special Leave Petition preferred by the revenue was dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India and the same has been relied upon by this Hon’ble Court in favour of the assessee in Income Tax Appeal No.177 of 2001. 4. In this view of the matter, he submits that no question of law arises in this appeal. The learned counsel for the revenue fairly concedes to this fact. In this view of the matter, no substantial question of law is involved in this appeal. 5. The appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. (V.C. Daga, J.) (J.P. Devadhar, J.)