K.J. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATRE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JRISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.215 OF 2005 The CIT-9 ..Appellant Versus M/s.Lokhandwala Construction Industries Limited ..Respondents ---- Mr.P.S.Sahadevan for the appellant. Dr.K.Shivram with Mr.A.R.Singh for the respondents. ---- Coram : F.I.Rebello & R.S.Mohite,JJ Coram : F.I.Rebello & R.S.Mohite,JJ Coram : F.I.Rebello & R.S.Mohite,JJ Date : 18.03.2008. PC 1. Learned Counsel appearing for the respondents states that both the questions are covered. In so far as question-A is concerned, the same is covered by the judgment reported in 260 ITR 579. 2. In so far as question-B is concerned, the same is covered by the judgment in the assessee’s own case in Income-tax Appeal No.717 of 2002 and other appeals dated 12.10.2007 ( CIT V/s. M/s.Lokhandwala Constructions Pvt.Ltd., V/s. CIT). 3. Considering the above, the questions as framed would not arise and consequently appeal dismissed. : 2 : (R.S.Mohite,J) (F.I.Rebello,J) (R.S.Mohite,J) (F.I.Rebello,J) (R.S.Mohite,J) (F.I.Rebello,J)