IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME INCOME INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1366 OF 2007 TAX APPEAL NO.1366 OF 2007 TAX APPEAL NO.1366 OF 2007 The Commissioner of Income Tax .. Appellant 9 Mumbai Vs. M/s Crystal Granite & Marbles Ltd.. Respondent Mr.P.S.Sahadevan for Appellant None for Respondent CORAM CORAM CORAM : Dr.S.Radhakrishnan and : Dr.S.Radhakrishnan and : Dr.S.Radhakrishnan and A.V.Nirgude, A.V.Nirgude, A.V.Nirgude, JJ JJ JJ DATE DATE DATE : 14th July, 2008 : 14th July, 2008 : 14th July, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant. The appellant is seeking to raise three substantial questions of law: i) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon’ble Tribunal was justified in upholding the order of the CIT (A) allowing the deduction u/s 80HHC with reference to the Book Profit in computing the total income u/s 115 JA. ii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon’ble Tribunal was justified in deleting the addition of Rs.4,83,420/- on account of provision for Gratuity in computing the Book Profit u/s. 115 J ? iii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon’ble Tribunal was justified in confirming the finding of the CIT (A) in deleting interest charged u/s 234 B & 234 C with reference to the total income computed u/s 115 JA? 2 iv) Any other question of law as the Hon’ble High Court may formulate and decide. 2. From a perusal of the ITAT order dt. 27.6.2007 it is apparent that the very first issue is squarely covered by the judgment of the tribunal itself in DCIT vs Syncome Formulations (I) Ltd (2007) 108 TTJ (SB). Learned counsel for the appellant is unable to point out whether the revenue has challenged the same or not ? As far as second question is concerned, the same is covered by our judgment in CIT vs. Echjay Foreigners Pvt.Ltd (2001) 251 ITR 15 which is against the revenue. As far as last question is concerned, the same is against the revenue by judgment of CIT vs Kwality Biscuits Ltd (2006) 484 ITR 434. In view thereof, there is no substantial questions of law involved. Appeal stands dismissed. { A.V.Nirgude, J } { Dr.S.Radhakrishnan, J } A.V.Nirgude, J } { Dr.S.Radhakrishnan, J } A.V.Nirgude, J } { Dr.S.Radhakrishnan, J }