https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15380 Section 260A(5) of the Income-tax Act requires the High Court to decide the formulated question of law and deliver judgment on it. Where the same question had already been decided by the same High Court against the Revenue, the pendency of an appeal against that earlier ruling before the Supreme Court did not make the precedent ineffective or justify re-admission of the same issue. The Court stated that repeated appeals on an identical question were unnecessary, and any answer on admission would still have to follow the earlier decision. The appeal was therefore not entertained and was rejected. en-us Wed, 01 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 06 Aug 2009 11:46:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15380 Section 260A(5) of the Income-tax Act requires the High Court to decide the formulated question of law and deliver judgment on it. Where the same question had already been decided by the same High Court against the Revenue, the pendency of an appeal against that earlier ruling before the Supreme Court did not make the precedent ineffective or justify re-admission of the same issue. The Court stated that repeated appeals on an identical question were unnecessary, and any answer on admission would still have to follow the earlier decision. The appeal was therefore not entertained and was rejected. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 01 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15380