(PER : HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI)
1. By this appeal under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the appellant has challenged the order dated 16.7.2018 made by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'A', Ahmedabad, in ITA No.994/Ahd/2015 by proposing the following question, stated to be a substantial question of law.
"Whether the Appellate Tribunal has erred in law and on facts in upholding the decision of the CIT (A) of deletion of disallowance amounting to Rs.3,89,90,537/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of provision of bad and doubtful debts made by assessee?"
2. Heard Mrs. Mauna Bhatt, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant. A perusal of the impugned order passed by the Tribunal reveals that the Tribunal has placed reliance upon its decision in the assessee's own case for the Page 1 of 2 C/TAXAP/1389/2018 ORDER assessment year 2006-07 rendered in ITA No. 335/Ahd/2011 dated 27.10.2016.
3. It is an admitted position that against the said order passed by the Tribunal in assessee's own case for the assessment year 2006-07, revenue preferred an appeal before the High Court being Tax Appeal No. 984 of 2018, which came to be dismissed by an order dated 14.8.2018. The controversy involved in the present appeal, therefore, stands concluded by the above decision. It is, therefore, not necessary to set out the facts and contentions in detail.
4. For the reasons recorded by this court in the order dated 14.8.2018 made in Tax Appeal No. 984 of 2018, this appeal does not give rise to any question of law, much less, a substantial question of law, warranting interference. The appeal therefore fails and is accordingly summarily dismissed.
(HARSHA DEVANI, J) (A. P. THAKER, J) R.S. MALEK Page 2 of 2