1 itxa688-689 ssp IN HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.688 OF 2015 WITH INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.689 OF 2015 Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 28, Navi Mumbai ...Appellant (in both appeals) vs. M/s.Abhishek Enterprises ...Respondent (in both appeals) Ms S.V.Bharucha for appellant None for respondent CORAM : A.S.OKA, & A.K.MENON,JJ. DATE : NOVEMBER 7, 2017 P.C.: 1 These two appeals take exception to common Judgment and order dated 31 st October 2014 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bench, Mumbai (for short Appellate Tribunal) by which these two appeals preferred by revenue and cross objections filed by assessee were dismissed. 2 With view to appreciate submissions, brief reference to factual controversy will have to be made. appeals relate to year 2006 2007. appeal No.4095/M/11 is quantum appeal preferred by revenue by which challenge is to order passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) holding that respondent assessee is entitled to deduction under section 80 IB (10) ::: Uploaded on - 14/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 17/11/2017 11:49:31 ::: 2 itxa688-689 of Income Tax Act,1961. cross objection is filed by assessee raising issue of denial of exemption under section 80 IB (10) in respect of interest receipts earned by respondent assessee on temporary deposit of excess funds with institutions. appeal No.4468/M/11 is preferred by revenue arising out of order passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) setting aside order of penalty. 3 As far as appeal No.4095/M/11 is concerned, learned counsel for appellant does not dispute that finding recorded by Tribunal is consistent with law laid down by this Court in case of Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai vs. M/s. Happy Home Enterprises decided by Division Bench of this Court by Judgment and Order dated 19th September 2014 in Income Tax Appeal No.201 of 2012 and other connected appeals. Her submission is that Special Leave Petition has been preferred by appellant revenue against said Judgment and order dated 19th September 2014. As far as this Court is concerned, decision dated 19 th September 2014 is final and binding. fact that Special Leave Petition filed by appellant against said decision is pending does not give rise to any substantial question of law. order which is subject matter of challenge in Appeal No.4468/M/11 is consequential order in penalty appeal. ::: Uploaded on - 14/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 17/11/2017 11:49:31 ::: 3 itxa688-689 4 Therefore, no substantial question of law arises in both appeals. Accordingly, appeals are dismissed with no order as to costs. (A.K.MENON,J.) (A.S.OKA,J.) ::: Uploaded on - 14/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 17/11/2017 11:49:31 ::: ThePrincipalCommissionerof Income-tax-28,NaviMumbai v. AbhishekEnterprise