Principal Commissioner Of Income ... vs M/S.Vbc Ferro Alloys Limited
2023 Latest Caselaw 3643 Tel

              THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY
                               AND
              THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

                     I.T.T.A. No. 497 of 2018
JUDGMENT:

Heard Mr. J.V. Prasad, learned Senior Standing Counsel for

Income Tax appearing for the appellant and perused the record.

2. The instant appeal has been filed by the Department

assailing the order dated 13.04.2018 passed in

I.T.A.No.769/Hyd/2016 by the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal

Hyderabad Bench 'A', Hyderabad (hereinafter referred to as "the

Tribunal").

3. Vide order dated 13.04.2018, the Tribunal had rejected the

appeal preferred by the Revenue assailing the order dated

29.03.2016 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal.

4. The question of law to be considered by this Court while

entertaining the appeal was whether the deletion of disallowed

interest and debited to the Profit and Loss Account in respect of

investments in KGPL and shares in other companies were without

due appreciation of facts and reasons or not. However, when we go

through the impugned order, it has been categorically reflected that

the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal, while considering the

appeal of the assessee had relied upon a decision of the Hon'ble

Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities and

Power Limited 1. The Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal had

also relied upon the decision rendered by the Tribunal on

09.01.2009 in I.T.A.No.341/Hyd/06 in the case of Natco Phanna

Ltd., Vs. ACIT.

5. Today, when the matter is taken up for admission, on a

query being put to the learned counsel for the Department, it has

been informed that the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court

has further been affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, whereby,

the SLP preferred by the Revenue stands rejected affirming the

orders passed by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court.

6. Given the fact that the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal

as also the Tribunal had followed the decision of the

Hon'ble Bombay High Court, which further stands affirmed by the

Hon'ble Supreme Court, the question of law that now is being

canvassed by the appellant cannot be said to be one which is a

substantial question of law any further and neither can it be said

that the Tribunal nor the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal had

committed any error on their part in reaching to the said

conclusion.

(2009) 313 ITR 340 (Bom.)

7. In view thereof, we do not find any substantial question of

law made out in the appeal and thus, the appeal fails and is

accordingly rejected. No order as to costs.

Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall

stand closed.

_________________ P.SAM KOSHY, J

___________________ N.TUKARAMJI, J

Dated: 07.11.2023 Pvt

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

I.T.T.A. No. 497 of 2018

Dated: 07.11.2023

Pvt