2009 (11) TMI 50

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... jay Bansal, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Prashant Bansal, Advocate for the assessee. ORDER: 1. This appeal has been preferred by revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, "the Act") against the order dated 31.5.2005 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench 'A' in I.T.A. No.5/Chandi/1996 for the assessment year 1993-94, proposing to raise following substantial que .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... to be treated as capital expenditure?" 2. Learned counsel for the revenue fairly states that question No.1 can no longer be pressed in view of judgment of the  Hon'ble Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Lakshmi Machine (2007) 290 ITR 667 and judgment of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Vardhman Polytex Ltd. (2008) 296 ITR 382. 3. With regard to question No.2, it is su .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X