Vishal Tools & Forgings Private Limited v. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Jalandhar

ITA No. 124 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Vishal Tools & Forgings Private Limited Versus Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar ITA No. 124 of 2011 Date of Decision: 16.8.2011 ....Appellant. ...Respondent. CORAM:-HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL,ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. PRESENT: Mr. Pankaj Jain, Advocate for the appellant. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1.This appeal has been preferred by the assessee underSection 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order dated9.10.2009 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AmritsarBench, Amritsar, in ITA No. 157/Asr/2009, for the assessment year2004-05, claiming the following substantial questions of law:- (a)Whether on the true and correct interpretation ofSection 234B of the Act, the levy of interest ismandatory where there is a conflict of decision andthe admitted that liability stands paid?Section 234B of the Act, the levy of interest ismandatory where there is a conflict of decision andthe admitted that liability stands paid? (b)Whether on the true and correct interpretation ofSection 57(iii) of the claim of expenditure for earningSection 57(iii) of the claim of expenditure for earning the interest is to be allowed under the Head IncomeFrom Other Sources while computing the ChargeableIncome? (c)Whether on the true and correct interpretation of theprovision of section 80HHC r.w. Section 80IA(9) r.w.Section 80IB(13) the Tribunal has erred in restrictingthe claim of deduction under the Act?” 2.Learned counsel for the assessee states that he is notpressing question (b) while question (a) is covered against theassessee by the order of this Court dated 20.5.2011 in ITA No. 121 of2011 [Vishal Tools and Forgings Private Limited v. Commissionerof Income Tax, Jalandhar (Punjab)] and question (c) is coveredagainst the assessee by the order of this Court dated 18.4.2011 in ITANo. 469 of 2010 [Asin Exim International v. Commissioner ofIncome Tax, Jalandhar, Punjab]. 3.In view of the above, the appeal is dismissed. (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE August 16, 2011gbs (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE