Prior year ruling controls subsequent tax appeal where no distinguishing facts are shown, leaving revenue's challenge unsuccessful.

Where the same tax issue had already been decided against the revenue in the assessee's own earlier assessment year, and that view was followed from Commissioner of Income Tax v. Gem Plus Jewellery India Ltd., the later appeal could not succeed without any distinguishing feature. The Bombay High Court therefore treated the controversy as covered by its prior ruling and decided the issue in favour of the assessee, rejecting the revenue's appeal.

---

---

Issues: Whether the revenue's appeal for assessment year 2007-08 could succeed when the same issue had already been decided against the revenue in the assessee's earlier year and the governing precedent had been followed.

Analysis: The appeal concerned an issue already covered by the court's earlier decision in the assessee's own case for a prior assessment year. The earlier decision had been rendered by following the precedent in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Gem Plus Jewellery India Ltd., and no distinguishing feature was shown to take a different view for the present year.

Conclusion: The issue was decided against the revenue and in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The appeal was rejected because the controversy stood covered by the court's earlier ruling in the assessee's favour.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the same tax issue is already decided against the revenue in the assessee's own case and no distinguishing circumstance is shown, the later appeal follows the earlier binding view.

---