Binding precedent on cess and interest accounting left no substantial question of law, so the appeal was not admitted.

Binding precedent settled the levy of cess on green leaf, so no substantial question of law arose on that issue. The court also upheld deletion of the addition relating to interest income because the assessee followed the mercantile system of accounting, the Tribunal accepted the treatment of the income, and the point was covered by binding precedent. As both issues were already governed by settled law, the appellate court declined to admit the appeal and dismissed it.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether any substantial question of law arose on the levy of cess on green leaf. (ii) Whether any substantial question of law arose on deletion of the addition relating to interest received during the year and the assessee's method of accounting.

Issue (i): Whether any substantial question of law arose on the levy of cess on green leaf.

Analysis: The point stood settled by the apex court and the issue had already been affirmed in earlier binding precedent of the same court.

Conclusion: No substantial question of law arose on the cess issue.

Issue (ii): Whether any substantial question of law arose on deletion of the addition relating to interest received during the year and the assessee's method of accounting.

Analysis: The assessee followed the mercantile system of accounting, and the Tribunal had affirmed the appellate finding on the treatment of the interest income. The issue was also covered by binding precedent.

Conclusion: No infirmity was found in the deletion of the addition, and no substantial question of law arose on this issue.

Final Conclusion: The appeal was not admitted and was dismissed after holding that no substantial question of law arose.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the issues are already covered by binding precedent and no substantial question of law arises, the appellate court will decline to admit the appeal.

---