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 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.588 OF 2003 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.588 OF 2003 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.588 OF 2003 The West Coast Paper Mills Ltd. .. Appellant Vs. Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax .. Respondent Mr.S.J.Mehta for the Appellant. Mr.Vimal Gupta for the Respondent. CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & S.J.KATHAWALLA, JJ. S.J.KATHAWALLA, JJ. S.J.KATHAWALLA, JJ. DATE : 7th August, 2008 DATE : 7th August, 2008 DATE : 7th August, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Both the learned Counsel for the parties state that as far as the first question raised in this Appeal is concerned the same has already been answered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in favour of the Revenue and against the Assessee in the case of Britannia Industries Britannia Industries Britannia Industries Ltd V/s.CIT - 278 ITR 546 (SC) Ltd V/s.CIT - 278 ITR 546 (SC) Ltd V/s.CIT - 278 ITR 546 (SC), and so far as second question of law raised in this Appeal is concerned the same has already been answered by this Court (in Assessee’s own case) in favour of the Assessee and against the Revenue in the case of CIT V/s.West Coast CIT V/s.West Coast CIT V/s.West Coast Papers Ltd. - 250 ITR 506 Papers Ltd. - 250 ITR 506 Papers Ltd. - 250 ITR 506. 2. Accordingly, the first question of law raised in this Appeal is answered in favour of the Revenue and against the Assessee, and the second question of law raised in this Appeal is answered in favour of the Assessee and against the Revenue. Appeal stands disposed of. (S.J.KATHAWALLA, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) (S.J.KATHAWALLA, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) (S.J.KATHAWALLA, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.)