1 itxa2183-10 agk IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.2183 OF 2010 Aditya D. Mahadevia ..Appellant. Versus The Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax, Circue 16(2), Mumbai ..Respondent. Mr.Jitendra Jain with Mr.B.D. Damodar i/by M/s.Kanga & Co. for the appellant. Ms.Padma Divakar for the respondent. CORAM : J.P. Devadhar & Smt.R.S. Dalvi, JJ. DATE : 18th April, 2011. P.C. : 1. This appeal was admitted on 23-11-2010 on the following substantial questions of law. A) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal erred in holding that sub-clause (d) of the proviso to Section 43(5) of the Act are not clarificatory but prospective in operation from 1-4-2006 i.e. for assessment year 2006-07 onwards ? B) If answer to (A) is in favour of the Revenue, then whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the tribunal was erred in holding that the derivative transaction fall within the phrase ‘commodity, including stocks and shares’ so as to fall within ambit of Section 43(5) of the Act ?” 2 itxa2183-10 2. Learned counsel for the parties state that the aforesaid questions are answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee by the decision of this Court in the case of The Commissioner of Income Tax, Central – IV, Mumbai V/s. Shri Bharat R. Ruia (HUF), being Income Tax Appeal No. 1539 of 2010 decided on 18-04-2011. 3. In this view of the matter, the appeal is dismissed. No costs. (Smt.R.S. Dalvi, J.) (J.P. Devadhar, J.)