:1: bgp bgp bgp IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME INCOME INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.181 OF 2006 TAX APPEAL NO.181 OF 2006 TAX APPEAL NO.181 OF 2006 The Commissioner of Income Tax, ..Appellant Vs. M/s.Vita Investments and Trading Co. Pvt.Ltd. ..Respondent Mr.Vimal Gupta for the Appellant. Mr.J.D.Mistry a/w. Mr.Raj Darak for the Respondent. CORAM CORAM CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & V.C.DAGA, V.C.DAGA, V.C.DAGA, JJ. JJ. JJ. DATE DATE DATE : 10TH NOVEMBER, 2008 : 10TH NOVEMBER, 2008 : 10TH NOVEMBER, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. . Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. In the above, the Appellant is seeking to raise the following substantial questions of law: a. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Learned CIT (A) erred in law in holding that the loss of Rs.38,57,659/- incurred on sale of part B of H series Debentures and NCDS of J Series Debentures of M/s.Reliance Industries Ltd. is admissible as a genuine loss and was a contrived loss as held by the Assessing Officer? b. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Learned CIT(A) erred in directing the Assessing Officer to allow deduction u/s.80-M in respect of the gross amount of dividends without adjusting any proportionate amount of interest attributable to the dividend income. :2: 2. So far as question No.1 is concerned, the learned Counsel for the Respondent pointed out that the very same question of law is covered in the case of Income Tax Application No. 11 of 1999, Income Tax Application No. 11 of 1999, Income Tax Application No. 11 of 1999, Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner of of of Income Tax Vs. Lazor Syntex Ltd. Income Tax Vs. Lazor Syntex Ltd. Income Tax Vs. Lazor Syntex Ltd. and by our order dated 11th June,2007, we had declined to entertain the said Appeal. The second question of law is also covered by an order of this Court in Income Income Income Tax Tax Tax Appeal No.552 of 2007, Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal No.552 of 2007, Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal No.552 of 2007, Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Vs. Vs. M/s.Akshay Textiles Trading & Agencies Pvt.Ltd. M/s.Akshay Textiles Trading & Agencies Pvt.Ltd. M/s.Akshay Textiles Trading & Agencies Pvt.Ltd. dated dated dated 23rd January,2008, 23rd January,2008, 23rd January,2008, in favour of the Assessee and against the Revenue. 3. In view of the aforesaid orders dated 11th June,2007 and 23rd January,2008, for the same reasons indicated therein, we are not inclined to entertain the present Appeal. Hence, the same stands dismissed. (V.C.DAGA,J.) (V.C.DAGA,J.) (V.C.DAGA,J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.)