IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA TAX APPEAL NO. 25 OF 2006 M/S. RATNALAYA PVT. LTD., REPR. BY ....Appellant ITS DIRECTOR SHRI S. R. KANE Versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME ....Respondent TAX, PANAJI-GOA. Mr. Sudin M. S. Usgaonkar, Advocate for the Appellant. Mr. S. R. Rivonkar, Advocate for the Respondent. Coram:- V.C.DAGA & N. A. BRITTO, JJ. Date:- 24th July, 2006 P.C.:- Heard. The appeal raises following substantial question of law. (a) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the tribunal was right in holding that the sum of Rs.20,40,000/- was liable to tax under the provisions of section 41(1) of the Act? In view of the Judgment of this Court in the case of Nectar Beverages P.Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax reported in ((2004) 267 ITR 385) the above question of law stands answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee for the reasons stated therein. In the result, the appeal stands dismissed with no order as to costs. V.C.DAGA, J. N. A. BRITTO, J. RD.