AGK AGK AGK IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1500 OF 2009 WITH INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.4130 OF 2008 AND NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1501 OF 2009 WITH INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.4128 OF 2008 AND NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1514 OF 2009 WITH INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.4133 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income- Tax - 2, Mumbai ..Applicant. V/s. Tata Power Co. Limited ..Respondent. NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1510 OF 2009 WITH INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.491 OF 2009 The Commissioner of Income- Tax - 2, Mumbai ..Applicant. V/s. Andhra Valley Power Supply Co. Limited ..Respondent. Mr.Vimal Gupta with Mr.P.S. Sahadevan for the applicant. Mr.Dinesh Vyas, senior counsel with Mr.Ajit Shah & Mr.P.C. Tripathi for the respondent. CORAM : V.C. DAGA & J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 7TH MAY, 2009. P.C. : 1. By consent of both the parties, delay caused in filing in all the appeals is condoned. The notices of motion are disposed of accordingly. 2. The appeals are taken up for admission by consent of both the parties. 3. Heard learned counsel for the revenue and the learned counsel for the respondent. 4. The tribunal decided the question raised in these appeals on the basis of the order of the tribunal in the assessee’s own case on identical issue for earlier assessment years. Though the statement is made that the revenue is in appeal against those orders, no details thereof are disclosed. The learned counsel appearing for the assessee brought to our notice the order of the Division Bench of this Court dated 7-12-1999 passed in Income Tax Appeal No.72 of 1999, wherein reference is made to the judgment of the tribunal in the case of assessee themselves, where after considering the facts before it and the orders of the Pollution Control Board, it had held that the assessee was obliged to dispose of the ash in the manner in which it had done and that its intention was not to develop the land as contended by the department. It is also brought to our notice that the said judgment of the tribunal was subjected to a Reference Application under Section 256(1) of the Act before the Tribunal and the Tribunal has rejected the reference application of the department. Against that order, the department came up to this Court and this Court after having examined the findings of fact recorded held that no substantial question of law was involved and accordingly the appeal was dismissed. Said order has become final and conclusive. 5. In this view of the matter, we see no question of law involved in these appeals. The appeals, are therefore, dismissed with no order as to costs. (V.C. Daga, J.) (J.P. Devadhar, J.)