IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. I.T.A. No.417 of 2010 Date of decision: 2.11.2010 The Commissioner of Income Tax. -----Appellant. Vs. M/s Punjab State Electricity Board. -----Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present:- Mr. T.K. Joshi, Advocate for the appellant. --- ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. This appeal has been preferred by the revenue under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “the Act”) against the order dated 30.7.2009 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh in I.T.A. No.125/Chd/2009 for the assessment year 2001-02 proposing to raise following substantial questions of law:- (i) “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT is legally correct in holding that in the present case, no colourable device has been adopted by the assessee behind drafting the agreements between the assessee and the financial institution was to reduce the tax liability artificially of both the parties and as such the ratio of the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Mc Dowell Ltd. vs CTO (154 ITR 148) (SC) has wrongly been interpreted. I.T.A. No.417 of 2010 (ii) Whether the ITAT’s order is perverse in not appreciating the facts and the law point by piercing the corporate veil in order to see the real intention of the assessee to understate its income and defeat the revenue of its rightful dues by using ‘colourable devices’ as per decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Mc Dowell Ltd. vs CTO (154 ITR 148) (SC)”. Learned counsel for the revenue fairly states that the matter is covered against the revenue by order of this Court dated 9.7.2009 in I.T.A. No.227 of 2009 CIT v. M/s Punjab State Electricity Board. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed. (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) JUDGE November 02, 2010 (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) ashwani JUDGE 2