IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. I.T.A. No.68 of 2011 Date of decision: 27.4.2011 Commissioner of Income Tax. -----Appellant. Vs. M/s A.R. Industries (P) Ltd. -----Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL Present:- Mr. Yogesh Putney , Sr. Standing Counsel 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 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi dated 2.7.2010 in ITA No.1893(Del)/2010 for the assessment year 2001-02 claiming following substantial questions of law:- “I. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. ITAT was right in law in upholding the order of the CIT(A) in allowing deduction of Rs.19,65,000/- claimed by the assessee on account of development charges for the product development as revenue expenditure by relying on Tribunal’s order for the I.T.A. No.68 of 2011 Asstt. Year 2000-01 dated 03-05-2005 in assessee’s case against which revenue’s appeal is pending before the Hon’ble High Court and without giving any reasons for his own? (ii) Whether, on the facts ad in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. ITAT has committee illegality by failing to consider all material facts and evidence brought on record and further failed to record the finding on the issue of allowing deduction of Rs.19,65,000/- claimed by the assessee on account of development charges even though it was obligatory on the part of the ITAT to decide the matter being the final authority of facts and not merely by follow the precedents without any discussion?” Learned counsel for the appellant fairly states that the matter is covered against the revenue by earlier order of this Court dated 1.12.2010 in I.T.A. No.272 of 2006 in CIT v. M/s A.R. Industries Pvt. Ltd. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed. (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) JUDGE April 27, 2011 ( AJAY KUMAR MITTAL ) ashwani JUDGE 2