- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O.O.C.J. INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.280 OF 2008 WITH INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.284 OF 2008 ----------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court’s or Judge’s appearances, Court’s orders order or directions ----------------------------------------------------- ¦ Mr.Suresh Kumar with Mr.B.M. ¦ Chatterjee for the Appellant. ¦ Ms.Beena Pillai i/b Nirag Pumania ¦ for the Respondent. ¦ ¦ ¦ CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH & ¦ J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. ¦ DATED: 7TH AUGUST, 2008 P.C.: Both appeals relate to the same assessee, but to different years. The real question that arises for consideration in these appeals appears to have been decided by the Appellate Commissioner while hearing Appeal relating to the assessment year 1997-98. It is common ground that the finding recorded on the - 2 - question which is raised in these appeals by the Appellate Commissioner in 1997-98 was not challenged in the appeal filed by the Department before the tribunal. The tribunal, therefore, in this situation has chosen to follow the order passed by the Appellate Commissioner during the year 1997-98 on this question. Because the learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant submitted that the Appeal against the order passed on this point during the year 1997-98 might have not been filed, still they can file appeal during the subsequent year raising same point. Therefore, we wanted to find out what were the reasons given by the Appellate Commissioner in his order in the appeal relating to the year 1997-98. A copy of that order has also not been produced on record. In this situation, therefore, we are not able to find out whether there was any error in the order made by the Appellate Commissioner relating to the year 1997-98. Taking overall view of the matter, - 3 - therefore, in our opinion, it will not be in the interest of justice to entertain these Appeals. They are rejected. (D.K.DESHMUKH, J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR,J.)