IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. I.T.A. No.649 of 2005 & other connected case being I.T.A. No.91 of 2006 Date of decision: 8.12.2010 The Commissioner of Income Tax -----Appellant. Vs. M/s Punjab State Indl. Development Corporation. -----Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL Present:- Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Standing Counsel for the appellant. --- ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. This order will dispose of I.T.A. Nos.649 of 2005 and I.T.A. No.91 of 2006, as common questions of law are involved in both the appeals. I.T.A. No.649 of 2005 has been preferred by the revenue under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “the Act”) against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh in I.T.A. No.599/Chd./2003 for the assessment year 1998-99 raising following questions of law:- i) “Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Hon’ble ITAT is justified in holding that the sale of investments by the assessee was a I.T.A. No.649 of 2005 Capital Gain and not Profit and Gains from business, whereas the main business of the assessee is to make investments and earn profit from the same?” ii) “Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Hon’ble ITAT is justified in holding that the Project Survey Expenses should be treated as Revenue Expenditure, whereas the Project Survey Expenses are in the nature of Capital Expenditure?” Learned counsel for the revenue fairly states that both the questions have been earlier decided by this Court on 30.9.2010 in the case of the assessee itself being I.T.R. No.20 of 2000 The Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd., Chandigarh v. CIT. In view of above, the appeals are dismissed. A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of other connected case. (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) JUDGE December 08, 2010 (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) ashwani JUDGE 2