IN HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.401 OF 2014 Commissioner of Income Tax 10 Appellant V/s. Infrastructure Leasing & Financial Services Ltd. Respondent Mr.Arvind Pinto with Mr. N.C.Ranganayakulu for Appellant. Mr.Nitesh Joshi i/by Mr.Sameer Dalal for Respondent. CORAM : AKIL KURESHI AND M.S.SANKLECHA, JJ. DATE : FEBRUARY 15, 2019. P.C.: 1. At request of learned counsel for parties, appeal is taken up for admission herein today. 2. Learned counsel for revenue pressed following question before us at time of arguments : Whether on facts and in circumstances of case and in law, Tribunal was correct in holding that lease equalization charges are admissible deduction in Act, whereas there is no provision that allows such deduction? ::: Uploaded on - 18/02/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 19/02/2019 11:10:37 ::: Priya Soparkar 2 907 itxal 401 14 o He submitted that though two additional questions are framed by revenue in present appeal, eventually Tribunal has restored issue for fresh consideration before Assessing Officer. Hence, revenue focus on above noted question. It is undisputed that said issue is squarely covered by judgment of Supreme Court in case of Commissioner of Income tax VI Vs. Virtual Soft Systems Ltd. 1 in which it was held that method of accounting followed, as derived from ICAI's Guidance Note, is valid method of capturing real income based on substance of finance lease transaction. 3. In result, no question of law arises. Income Tax Appeal is disposed of. (M.S.SANKLECHA,J.) (AKIL KURESHI,J.) . Commissioner of Income-tax-10 v. Infrastructure Leasing & Financial Services Ltd