IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 
 . 
  24.11.2008 
.
 Present:        Mr R. D. Jolly for the Appellant. 
 Mr Manu K. Giri for the Respondent. 
.
 +  ITA 1304/2008 
.
 The present appeal pertains to assessment year 2004-05.  By virtue of the impugned order dated 29.02.2008, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal had ruled in favour of the assessee following its decision in respect of the assessment year 1998-99.  That decision was the subject matter of an appeal before this court being ITA 982/2006.  Although, there were two issues in that appeal and one of the issues has been admitted for hearing, the issue involved in the present case was held not to be a substantial question of law.  In the order dated 09.01.2008 passed by this court, it is observed as under:- 
 ?We have heard learned counsel for the parties in respect of the first issue, as mentioned in the order dated 9th July, 2007, pertaining to computation of deduction under Section 80IA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short the Act).  Our attention has been drawn by learned counsel for the Assessee to paragraph 7.5 of the order passed by the Tribunal. It has been noted by the Tribunal that Unit No. 196, 205 and 206 of the Assessee, which are the subject matter of this appeal, have been treated separately by the Revenue and profit and loss of each of these units has been accepted separately in the Assessment Years 1995-96, 1996-97 and 1997-98.  No clubbing, as resorted to by the Assessing Officer in respect of the present Assessment Year 1998-99, has been done in the past.  The Tribunal has noted that for the sake of consistency there is no reason clubbing should be resorted to for one particular assessment year.  We have gone through the grounds of appeal and find that the factual statement recorded by the Tribunal has not been controverted by the Revenue in the grounds of appeal, nor has the Revenue filed any application before the Tribunal under Section 254(2) of the Act for rectification of any factual error in this regard.  We, therefore, take the statement as recorded by the Tribunal to be correct and conclude that no substantial question of law arises in this regard since the Revenue has itself accepted the contention of the Assessee for the earlier assessment years.? 
.
 Consequently, we find that no substantial question of law arises for the consideration of this court in this year also.  The appeal is dismissed. 
.
 BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J 
.
.
.
 RAJIV SHAKDHER, J 
 November 24, 2008 
 rkb/SR 
.
.
 2