IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.177 OF 2001 The C.I.T. Bombay City-IV ..Appellant Versus M/s.Seksaria Biswas Sugar Fact.Ltd..Respondent ---- Mrs.P.P.Bhosale with Mr.S.S.Sahadevan for the appellant. Mr.Y.P.Trivedi with Mrs.Usha Dalal for respondent. ---- Coram : F.I.Rebello & Coram : F.I.Rebello & Coram : F.I.Rebello & R.S.Mohite,JJ R.S.Mohite,JJ R.S.Mohite,JJ Date : 4.2.2008 PC 1. The questions of law are as formulated in paragraph-5 of the memo of appeal. 2. In so far as question no.1 is concerned, the learned Tribunal referred to in paragraph-2 to various judgments including the judgment of this Court. The view taken there has been reiterated in CIT V/s.Chemet CIT V/s.Chemet CIT V/s.Chemet reported in 240 ITR 624. In the light of the above, the first question would not arise. 3. In so far as 2nd question is concerned, the learned Tribunal has recorded the finding of fact that it is a capital receipt. On similar issue the High Court of Calcutta in CIT V/s.Balrampur Chinni CIT V/s.Balrampur Chinni CIT V/s.Balrampur Chinni : 2 : Mills Mills Mills reported in 238 ITR 445 had taken a similar view. The learned Counsel submits that special leave preferred against the said judgment is dismissed. In the light of that, in our opinion, 2nd question also would not arise. 4. In the light of the above, appeal dismissed. (R.S.Mohite,J) (F.I.Rebello,J) (R.S.Mohite,J) (F.I.Rebello,J) (R.S.Mohite,J) (F.I.Rebello,J)