IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No. 217 of 2011 Date of decision: 29.9.2011 Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Karnal …..Appellant vs. Market Committee, Samlkha …..Respondent CORAM: - HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present: - Mr. Tejinder Joshi, Advocate for the appellant. HEMANT GUPTA, J Revenue has filed the present appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short the ‘Act’) raising the following substantial questions of law: - “i) whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. ITAT was justified in dismissing the appeal of the revenue on the issue regarding the action of the CIT(A) in directing the AO to allow the adjustment of the excess amount of application of income of previous years as application of income in the current year, despite there being no provision in Section 11 to 13 of the Act in this regard”. ii)Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. ITAT is right in law in allowing the assessee the benefit of unabsorbed depreciation and carried forwarded when there is no provision in the statue and provisions of Section 70 to 80 have not been specifically made applicable.” ITA No. 217 of 2011 The said substantial questions of law were raised by the revenue in ITA No. 238 of 2010, The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Market Committee, Karnal. This Court vide the order dated 28.7.2010 dismissed the said appeal. A Special Leave Petition arising out of ITA No. 241 of 2010 decided along with ITA No. 238 of 2010 as mentioned above, also stand dismissed on 15.7.2010 by Hon’ble the Supreme Court. In view of the said fact, for the reasons recorded in ITA No. 238 of 2010 decided on 28.7.2010, we do not find any substantial question of law arises in the present appeal. Dismissed. (HEMANT GUPTA) JUDGE (JASWANT SINGH) JUDGE 29.9.2011 preeti 2