( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WEALTH TAX APPLICATION NO.1 OF 2001 WEALTH TAX APPLICATION NO.1 OF 2001 WEALTH TAX APPLICATION NO.1 OF 2001 The Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Bombay City IX, Bombay .. Petitioner V/s Shri.Iqbal M.Halim .. Respondent Dr.P.Daniel for the Petitioner. CORAM: S.RADHAKRISHNAN & CORAM: S.RADHAKRISHNAN & CORAM: S.RADHAKRISHNAN & J.H.BHATIA, JJ. J.H.BHATIA, JJ. J.H.BHATIA, JJ. DATE : 01/07/2005. DATE : 01/07/2005. DATE : 01/07/2005. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner. By this Application, the Petitioner/Applicant has sought to raise the following substantial question of law:- "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law and in fact in allowing assessee’s claim for deduction of liability also u/s.2(m) of the Wealth Tax Act, when the same amount had already been allowed under Section 5(1A) of the Act. 2. We have perused the order of the Tribunal. In view of the judgment of our High Court in the case of CWT (A) CWT (A) CWT (A) V/s.Vasantkumar Govindji Kotak - 186 ITR 91 V/s.Vasantkumar Govindji Kotak - 186 ITR 91 V/s.Vasantkumar Govindji Kotak - 186 ITR 91, the above question has already been answered. Hence we are not inclined to entertain the present Application. The present Application stands dismissed. (S.RADHAKRISHNAN J.) (S.RADHAKRISHNAN J.) (S.RADHAKRISHNAN J.) ( 2 ) (J.H.BHATIA J.) (J.H.BHATIA J.) (J.H.BHATIA J.)