IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. I.T.C. No. 17 of 1993 DATE OF DECISION : 28.04.2008 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Haryana, Rohtak .... PETITIONER Versus Sh. Satinder Kumar Jain ..... RESPONDENT CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG Present: Mr. Sanjeev Kaushik, Advocate, for the petitioner. * * * SATISH KUMAR MITTAL , J. ( Oral ) This petition has been filed by the revenue under Section 256 (2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act'), for asking the Tribunal to refer the following question of law to this Court : “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in holding that there is no justification for assessing interest amounts in various years in the hands of the assessee especially when the payment of enhanced compensation or quantification of enhanced compensation was in dispute?” According to the petitioner, the aforesaid question of law is arising out of ITC No. 17 of 1993 -2- the Tribunal's order dated 30.10.1991 in ITA No. 5219 (Del)/91 for the assessment year 1976-77, in case of assessee Satinder Kumar Jain. A perusal of the order of the Tribunal shows that it has taken the decision on the basis of its earlier decision in ITA No. 5223 (Del) 1990 in case of the co-assessee Jainender Kumar Jain for the assessment year 1976-77. In that order, by following the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of C.I.T. v. Hindustan Housing Board and Land Development Trust Ltd., 161 ITR 524, it was held that proceedings under Section 147 (a) of the Act were bad in law. Counsel for the petitioner, on written instructions from the department, states that against the decision of the Tribunal in ITA No. 5223 (Del) 1990 for the assessment year 1976-77, in case of co-assessee Jainender Kumar Jain, probably no reference was filed and that decision has become final. In view of the aforesaid fact and the law laid down in Hindustan Housing Board's case (supra) and when decision of the co- assessee Jainender Kumar Jain has attained finality, we are not inclined to ask the Tribunal to refer the aforesaid question of law to this Court. Dismissed. ( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL ) JUDGE April 28, 2008 ( RAKESH KUMAR GARG ) ndj JUDGE