JUDGMENT : K.S. Jhaveri, J. 1. This Tax Appeal u/s. 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 is filed against the order dated 30.11.2005 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad in ITA No. 19/Ahd/2005 raising the following substantial questions of law for our consideration: "[A] Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in holding that the income from interest on inter corporate deposit was not chargeable to tax under the Interest Tax Act? [B] Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in holding that inter corporate deposit can neither be treated as loan nor an advance and thereby directing the Assessing Officer to exclude the interest on inter corporate deposit from the assessment of the assessee? [C] Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in cancelling the penalty levied u/s. 13 of the Interest Act?" 2. The facts in brief are that for the A.Y. 1999-2000 the assessee-company had not filed Interest Tax return declaring the chargeable interest under the Interest Tax Act, 1974. On the basis of return filed for A.Y. 1999-2000, it was noticed that the assessee-company was liable to pay interest tax and therefore, Notice was issued to the assessee. Ultimately, the assessment order came to be passed on 22.09.2004 whereby, interest chargeable to tax came to be assessed. The appeal filed before the CIT(A) was rejected, vide order dated 06.02.2004. The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal vide order dated 30.11.2005. Hence, this appeal at the instance of Revenue. 3. Identical issues have already been decided by this Court in a group of appeals being Tax Appeal No. 1214/2007 & allied matters decided on 27.06.2016. For ready reference, the said judgment is reproduced hereunder: "1. These Tax Appeals under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 are filed against the common order dated 30.11.2005 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench A in ITA Nos. 18 to 20/Ahd/2005 and 45 to 47/Ahd/2004 raising the following common substantial questions of law: [A] Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in holding that the income from interest on inter corporate deposit was not chargeable to tax under the Interest Tax Act? 18 to 20/Ahd/2005 and 45 to 47/Ahd/2004 raising the following common substantial questions of law: [A] Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in holding that the income from interest on inter corporate deposit was not chargeable to tax under the Interest Tax Act? [B] Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in holding that inter corporate deposit can neither be treated as a loan nor an advance and thereby directing the Assessing Officer to exclude the interest on inter corporate deposit from the assessment of the assessee? [C] Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in canceling the penalty levied u/s. 13 of the Interest Act ? 2. Briefly stated, the facts are that the assessee Company had not filed interest tax return declaring chargeable interest under the Interest Tax Act, 1974 for the A.Y. 1998-1999. On the basis of return filed for the A.Y. 1998-1999, it was noticed that the assessee company was liable to pay interest tax. Therefore, Notice u/s. 10was issued to the assessee on 09.12.2003. The assessee company filed its return of chargeable interest under the Act on 30.12.2003 declaring NIL interest. Assessment proceedings were initiated and ultimately, the Assessing Officer passed the assessment order on 22.09.2004. Against the said order, the assessee filed appeals before the CIT(A). However, the CIT(A) dismissed the appeals vide order dated 22.04.2004 & 02.06.2005. Being aggrieved by the same, the assessee preferred second appeals before the Tribunal. The Tribunal allowed the appeals filed by the assessee vide order dated 30.11.2005. Hence, these appeals. 3. We have heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the documents on record. The question Nos. (1) & (2) raised in these appeals are already settled by a judgment of the Delhi High Court rendered in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Visisth Chay Vyapar Ltd., [2011] 339 ITR 157 (Delhi) ([2012] 20 taxmann.com 377 (Delhi)] wherein, it has been held that the expression advance occurring in section 2(7) along with the expression loan should take its colour from loan and cannot be given wider interpretation to include deposit as well, otherwise, money deposits given for investments, etc., would also qualify as advances and interest thereon would become exigible to the Interest-tax Act. Such a situation was never contemplated by the legislature. Such a situation was never contemplated by the legislature. Hence, inter-corporate deposit is not in the nature of loan or advance within the meaning of section 2(7) and therefore, not chargeable to the interest-tax under section 5. 4. We concur with the view taken by the Delhi High Court in the aforesaid decision and consequently, answer question Nos. (1) & (2) in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. Since the main issue is decided in favour of the assessee, question No. (3) is also answered in favour of the assessee since it is consequential in nature. 5. In view of the aforesaid, all the appeals stand dismissed. No order as to costs." 4. In view of the aforesaid, the issues raised in this Tax Appeal will be governed by the judgment of this Court rendered in Tax Appeal No. 1214/2007 & allied matters dated 27.06.2016. The questions are answered accordingly. The appeal stands disposed of. No order as to costs.