VPH IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 173 OF 2007 The Commissioner of Income Tax-10, Appellant Mumbai. Vs. M/s. Infrastructure Leasing Respondents & Financial Services Ltd. Mkr. J. S. Saluja, for the Appellant. Mr. Atul Jasnani & P. C. Tripathi, for the Respondent. CORAM : BILAL NAZKI, & A. A. KUMBHAKONI, J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 23, 2008. PC :- 1. The matter before the Tribunal was - Whether the interest on debenture bonds was chargeable as interest. It is submitted that this question is covered and concluded by the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Corporation Corporation Corporation Bank Bank Bank reported in [2007] 295 ITR (SC) 193, [2007] 295 ITR (SC) 193, [2007] 295 ITR (SC) 193, and as such the Revenue Appeal cannot be entertained. 2. The second question which is now reframed is - whether interest of Rs.76,96,74,525/- shown as interest on these transactions was in fact an interest - 2 - on loan transaction. This question, as rightly pointed by the learned counsel for the respondent, is a merely question of fact and there is a positive finding of the authorities below including the Tribunal, observing that "once it has held by me that the appellant company had entered into genuine leasing transaction and not in "loan transactions", there is no justification for inclusion of Rs.76,96,74,525 to the chargeable interest." There is a finding that the transaction was leasing transaction and not a loan transaction. Thereforefore, we feel that the second question, reframed cannot be gone into. Appeal is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- [ BILAL NAZKI, J.] Sd/- [ A. A. KUMBHAKONI, J.]