9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (9) TMI 667X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... This is revenue s appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for brevity, the Act ), against order dated 3.11.2004, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench A , Chandigarh (for brevity, the Tribunal), in I.T.A. No. 617/Chandi/2000, in respect of assessment year 1991-92. The revenue has claimed that the following substantial questions of law would arise for d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ged that second question stands already answered by a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax, Panchkula v. M/s Haryana Warehousing Corporation (I.T.A. No. 242 of 2006, decided on 20.4.2007), by rejecting the submission of the revenue. The Division Bench observed as under:- Section 210 of the Act provides for payment of advance tax by a person who is liable to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sis of Allahabad High Court decision in Commissioner of Income-tax v. U.P. State Warehousing Corporation, (1992) 195 I.T.R. 273 (All.). As no other decision was brought to the notice, therefore, the Revenue accepted the said decision. The assessee acted bonafide in conformity with the decision of the High Court, just because the decision was reversed by the Apex Court, liability to pay advance tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aryana Warehousing Corporation (supra). In so far as first question is concerned relating to depreciation, the revenue has filed an appeal against the order dated 17.5.2004, passed by the CIT (A), Panchkula, in respect of the same assessment year. The Tribunal upheld the order of the CIT (A) by placing reliance on a judgment of Hon ble the Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Sun Engineering Works ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s taken on record as Mark A . We asked Mr. Yogesh Putney as to whether any appeal has been preferred by the revenue against the aforementioned order. In response to the query made by us, Mr. Putney has placed on record a letter dated 23.8.2007, sent by the department stating that no such appeal has been filed as per the record. The aforementioned letter is taken on record as Mark B . In view ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
