1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA TAX APPEALS NOS.3 & 4 OF 2008 TAX APPEAL NO.3 OF 2008 Goa Carbon Ltd., Dempo House, Campal, Panaji, Goa. …. Appellant V/s The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Panaji, Goa, Having office at Aayakar Bhavan, Patto-Plaza, Panaji-Goa. … Respondent AND TAX APPEAL NO.4 OF 2008 Goa Carbon Ltd., Dempo House, Campal, Panaji, Goa. …. Appellant V/s The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Panaji, Goa, Having office at Aayakar Bhavan, Patto-Plaza, Panaji-Goa. … Respondent Shri Sudin Usgaonkar, Advocate for the Appellant. Mrs. A. Dessai, Advocate for the Respondent. CORAM : MOHIT S. SHAH, C.J. & F.M. REIS, J. DATE : 8th SEPTEMBER, 2011 JUDGMENT : (Per MOHIT S. SHAH, C.J.) These Tax Appeals under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 raises the same question which was raised in Tax Appeal No.13 of 2005 and other connected Tax Appeals, which came to be decided by the Division Bench of this Court, to which one of us 2 was a party (F.M. Reis, J.), by judgment dated 21/10/2010. There is no dispute about the fact that the same questions of law are raised in the present appeals also. 2. Following the aforesaid decision dated 21/10/2010 in Tax Appeal No.13 of 2005 and other connected Tax Appeals, we allow these appeals and hold that the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was not right in holding that the calcined petroleum coke manufactured by the appellant was a “mineral oil” within the meaning of Section 80 HHC (2)(b) of the Act. The question of law accordingly is answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. The decision of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal confirming the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax as also the judgment and order of the Commissioner of Income Tax dated 13/08/2007 under Section 263(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are quashed and set aside. 4. Both the appeals accordingly stand disposed of. MOHIT S. SHAH, C.J. F.M. REIS, J. NH/-