The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Faridabad v. M/S Porrits & Spencers (Asia) Limited, Faridabad

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH. ITA No.224 of 2008(O&M)Date of decision: 31.7.2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad -----Appellant Vs. M/s Porrits & Spencers (Asia) Limited, Faridabad. -----Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOELHON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY Present:- Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Standing Counsel for therevenue. Mr. Santosh Aggarwal and Mr. A.C.Jain,Advocates for the respondent-assessee. Adarsh Kumar Goel,J. 1.The revenue has filed this appeal under Section260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’)against the order dated 23.2.2007 passed by the IncomeTax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench ‘A’ New Delhi, inITA No.3433/DEL/200, for the assessment year 1997-98,proposing to raise following substantial questions of law:- “i) Whether the Hon’ble ITAT has erred in law in confirming the order of the CIT(A) inwhich the disallowance of Rs.3,14,809/- made bythe Assessing Officer on account of Foreign Tourof MD’s wife was deleted? ii) Whether the Hon’ble ITAT has erred in law inconfirming the order of the CIT(A) vide which thedisallowance of Rs.9,20,591/- made by theAssessing Officer on account of commission paidto Managing Director and the Executives, wasdeleted? iii) Whether the Hon’ble ITAT has erred in law inconfirming the order of the CIT(A) vide which thedisallowance of Rs.4,32,155/- made by theAssessing Officer on account of personal use ofCar was deleted?” 2.Learned counsel for the parties agree that question No.(i) is covered in favour of the assessee byorder of this Court dated 30.7.2007 in ITA No.220 of 2007 (Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad vs.M/s Porrits & Spencers (Asia) Limited, Faridabad). It is,however, clarified that the question is not correctly framed as the Tribunal has allowed 50% of the claim and not thewhole of it. 3.It is also stated that Question No.(ii) is coveredby order passed by this Court dated 5.3.2009 in the case ofthe assessee in ITA No.540 of 2006 (CIT v. M/s Porrits & Spencer (A) Limited,Faridabad), while Question No.(iii)is covered in favour of the assessee by order of this Courtdated 5.3.2009 in ITA No.38 of 2008 (CIT v. M/S Porrits.and Spencers Limited) 4.The appeal is disposed of accordingly. (Adarsh Kumar Goel)Judge July 31, 2009‘gs’ (Daya Chaudhary)Judge