Penny stock appeals followed an earlier connected ruling, with the substantial question of law decided for the revenue.

In penny stock appeals, the HC noted that an identical issue had already been decided in a connected batch of matters, and the parties accepted that the earlier ruling governed the present cases. Applying that binding earlier decision, the Court answered the substantial question of law in favour of the revenue and allowed the appeals.

---

---

Issues: Whether the revenue's appeals arising from penny stock cases were to be allowed and the substantial question of law answered in favour of the revenue.

Analysis: The Court noted that an identical issue had already been decided in a connected batch of appeals, where the appeals had been allowed. As the parties did not dispute that the earlier decision governed the present cases, the Court followed that decision and applied it to the appeals before it.

Conclusion: The substantial question of law was answered in favour of the revenue and the appeals were allowed.

---