1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1462 OF 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant. V/s. Jt. Venture of Shri Rasiklal A. Sanghvi & Shri Anish V. Shah ..Respondent. AND INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1493 OF 2009 Shri Rasiklal A. Sanghvi ..Appellant. V/s. The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Respondent. Mrs. Padma Divekar for appellant / revenue. Mr. P. Toprani for respondent / assessee. CORAM : V.C.DAGA AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 17TH DECEMBER, 2009. P.C. :- 1. Heard learned counsel for the revenue and learned counsel for the respondent / assessee in both the appeals. Mr. Rasiklal, the respondent in ITXA No.1493 of 2009 has filed an affidavit stating therein that the assessing officer assessed the profits separately as joint venture business in the status of A.O.P. and the same has been accepted by him even though as per declaration made under section 132(4) and in the block return, he had 2 included profit from joint venture in his individual returns. Learned counsel appearing for the revenue submits that in view of the affidavit, the question sought to be raised in this appeal does not arise since the assessee has been assessed in the status of A.O.P. The affidavit filed by Rasiklal is taken on record. 2. So far as the other questions are concerned, we do not find any fault in the view taken by the Tribunal. In this view of the matter, no substantial question of law arise in these appeals. The appeals are, therefore, dismissed in limini with no order as to costs. (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) (V.C.DAGA, J.)