1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.2871 OF 2009 AND INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.2872 OF 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant. V/s. M/s. Glaxo Smithkline Pharmaceuticals Ltd. ..Respondent. Ms. Suchitra Kamble for appellant. Mr. Percy J. Pardiwala, senior Advocate with Naresh Chheda i/b. M & M Legal Centures for respondent. CORAM : DR. D.Y.CHANDRACHUD AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 12TH MARCH, 2010 P.C. :- 1. The appeals by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the ITAT dated 5th June, 2009 raise the following question of law:- " Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT was correct in holding that the assessee's transactions are in the nature of "sale on contract" and not "works contract" as per the clauses of Agreement of assessee 2 company with the manufacturers ? " 2. These appeals have been placed for hearing together with a batch of appeals. We have delivered a judgment today in The Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) V/s. M/s. Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Ltd. [Income Tax Appeal No.2256 of 2009). Counsel appearing on behalf of the Revenue and the assessee have stated that the facts of the present case are similar to those in the aforesaid appeal. For the reasons indicated in the aforesaid judgment, these appeals do not raise any substantial question of law. Both the appeals are accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) (DR. D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, J.)