-:1:- IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORIGINAL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL JURISDICTION INCOME INCOME INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 49 OF 2008 TAX APPEAL NO. 49 OF 2008 TAX APPEAL NO. 49 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income-tax-19, Piramal Chambers, Parel, Mumbai - 400 012. ... Appellant. V/s. Smt. Padma Ishwar Jashnani, 701, Gulmohar Apartments, 54, Auxillium Convent Road, Pali Hill, Bandra - West, Mumbai - 400 050. ... Respondent. ... Mr. R.G. Bhatt for the Appellant. Mr. K. Gopal with Mr. Jitendra Singh for the Respondents. ... CORAM CORAM CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & : F.I. REBELLO & : F.I. REBELLO & K.U. K.U. K.U. CHANDIWAL,JJ. CHANDIWAL,JJ. CHANDIWAL,JJ. DATE DATE DATE : 25TH JUNE, 2008. : 25TH JUNE, 2008. : 25TH JUNE, 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. : : : . The learned CIT(A) lodged the appeal preferred by the assessee. The appeal preferred by revenue was dismissed by order dated 29.05.2007. Both CIT(A) and ITAT while deciding the appeal relied on the Judgment of this Court in the case of CIT V/s. Shamlal Balram Gurbani (2001) 249 ITR 501 (Bom.). 2. On behalf of revenue, the learned Counsel sought to contend that the Judgment in the case of Shamlal Balram Gurbani (Supra) as distinguishable inasmuch as in those cases the firm have filed the returnes in advance where the income tax received by -:2:- the assessee were disclosed. We have perused the Judgement of ITAT and CIT. We do not find that either before CIT(A) or ITAT, the Judgment of this Court was sought to be distinguished on that time. 3. Considering that CIT(A) and ITAT have relied on the Judgement of this Court, the question of law does not arise and consequently, the Appeal is dismissed. (F.I. (F.I. (F.I. REBELLO, J.) REBELLO, J.) REBELLO, J.) (K.U. (K.U. (K.U. CHANDIWAL,J.) CHANDIWAL,J.) CHANDIWAL,J.)