Swaraj Engines Limited vs Commissioner Of Income Tax on 3 August, 2009

I.T.A. No. 890 of 2008 (O&M)                                   (1)

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH


                                      I.T.A. No. 890 of 2008 (O&M)

                                      DATE OF DECISION: 3.8.2009


Swaraj Engines Limited                           ..........Appellant

                         Versus

Commissioner of Income Tax, Chandigarh           ..........Respondent



CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL
        HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY



Present:-   Mr. Pankaj Jain, Advocate
            for the appellant.


                         ****


ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. (Oral)

1.. The assessee has preferred this appeal under Section 260A of

the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “the Act”) against the order of Income

Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench dated 11.7.2008 passed in ITA

No. 208/Chandi/2006 for the assessment year 1996-97, proposing to raise

following substantial questions of law:-

(i) Whether on the true and correct interpretation of the

provisions of Section 147 of the Income Tax Act,

1961, the initiation of the proceedings in pursuance to

the judgment of CIT Vs. Sterling Foods (1999) 237

ITR 579 (SC) is covered within the words “reasons to

believe”?

(ii)Whether under the facts and circumstances of the

case the Tribunal order is sustainable in having

disregard to the judgment of Co-ordinate Bench?

I.T.A. No. 890 of 2008 (O&M) (2)

2. Learned counsel for the assessee does not press question (i)

and with regard to question (ii), he says that matter has been dealt with by

the Tribunal in para 9 and his contention was wrongly recorded. His

contention was that interest income, if not covered under Section 80-I was

required to be taken into account as income from business or from other

sources and was required to be taken into account after making

adjustment of the interest paid.

3. The grievance of the assessee is, thus, against error in

noticing argument. The remedy of the assessee for such grievance is to

move Tribunal itself. No substantial question of law arises for

consideration under Section 260-A of the Act.

4. The appeal is disposed of.

                                            (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL)
                                                  JUDGE



August 03, 2009                             (DAYA CHAUDHARY)
pooja                                            JUDGE

Note:-Whether this case is to be referred to the Reporter …….Yes/No