:1: IN IN IN THE THE THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL LODGING NO.2815 OF 2007 WITH INCOME TAX APPEAL LODGING NO.2816 OF 2007 WITH INCOME TAX APPEAL LODGING NO.2817 OF 2007 The Commissioner of Income Tax. ..Appellant. Vs. M/s. Fortune Holdings Pvt. Ltd. ..Respondent. Mr.B.M.Chatterji with P.S.Sahadevan for the Appellant. Mr.A.K. Jasani for the Respondent. CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & R.S. MOHITE, JJ. DATE : 17TH MARCH, 2009 PC : 1. Not on board. Upon mentioning taken on board. 2. As similar matters have been taken on board, these matters are taken on board and by consent of the parties heard forthwith. 3. Our attention is invited by the learned counsel for the respondent that the appeals have been filed beyond the period of limitation and there is no application for condonation of delay. 4. On behalf of the revenue, the learned counsel makes an oral application that the delay be condoned. On oral application delay normally cannot be condoned. However, considering the questions of law as raised in these :2: appeals which are covered by the judgment of this court, in our opinion, delay can be condoned and the appeals can be disposed off in terms of the judgment of this court. 5. The first question raised in the aforesaid appeals is pertaining to quantum of appeal. Considering Section 249(4)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the same is covered by the judgment of this court in the case of Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner of Income Tax Central II Vs. M/s. Zest of Income Tax Central II Vs. M/s. Zest of Income Tax Central II Vs. M/s. Zest Holdings Holdings Holdings Pvt. Limited Pvt. Limited Pvt. Limited decided on 31.7.2008. 6. In so far as second question of dividend income where the assessee was not the joint owner of the shares has been considered by this court in the case of Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Aatur Holdings Pvt. of Income Tax Vs. Aatur Holdings Pvt. of Income Tax Vs. Aatur Holdings Pvt. Ltd. Ltd. Ltd. reported in 302 ITR 92. reported in 302 ITR 92. reported in 302 ITR 92. 7. In the light of above, there is no merit in the aforesaid appeals which are accordingly, dismissed. (R.S. MOHITE, J.) (F.I. REBELLO, J.)