2016 (2) TMI 1399

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Jasani. ORDER P.C. This Appeal by the Revenue under Section 260­A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) challenges the order dated 05th April, 2013 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The assessment year involved is Assessment Year 2007­2008. 2. We are satisfied with the reasons set out in the affidavit of Mr. S. Sinha the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax d....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....icer on account of redelivery of aircraft under 115JB of the Act of Rs. 6,89,13,899/­ and Rs. 1,96,62,235/­ ?" 3) "whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the ITAT is justified in deleting the addition made on account of depreciation on acquired on aircraft on hire purchase at Rs. 178,53,78,765/­ ?" 4) "whether on the facts ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e ITAT is justified in deleting the addition made on account of sale and lease back of 5 aircrafts at Rs. 145,89,72,190/­ u/s. 41(1)of the Act ?" 8) "whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the ITAT is justified in deleting the addition made on account of provision of gratuity u/s. 115JB at Rs. 10,87,83,063?" 4. Mr. Suresh Kumar, learned Couns....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....erein. In the above view, the questions as framed at serial Nos. 1, 3, 5, 6, 7 & 8 are not entertained for the reasons set out in our order dated 11th January 2016 passed in Income Tax Appeal No. 2111 of 2013 in respect of the same respondent ­ assessee. Accordingly, the aforesaid questions do not give rise to any substantial questions of law. Thus, not entertained. 5. Appeal is a....