JUDGMENT K.L. Manjunath, J.— This appeal is by the Revenue challenging the concurrent findings of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench, in I.T.A. No. 488/Bang/2000 raising the following substantial questions of law: Whether the Hindu undivided family which is a partnership firm is entitled for remuneration since no individual partner is working on behalf of the partnership firm? 2. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties. During the course of arguments, it is noticed by us that the Tribunal while dismissing the appeal of the Revenue has relied upon its judgment in I.T.A. No. 502/Bang/97 in the case of the assessee itself for the assessment year 1993-94. For the assessment year 1993-94, the relief had been granted by the Tribunal to the assessee holding that a karta who is representing the Hindu undivided family is entitled for remuneration under the partnership deed. The order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has been challenged by the Revenue. 3. We have ascertained from the registry that against the findings of the Tribunal in I.T.A. No. 502/Bang/97 the Revenue had come up in I.T.A. No. 1/2003 which has been rejected by this Court on July 23, 2003. Therefore, it is clear that the question raised by the Revenue in this appeal need not be answered by us since the finding of the Tribunal has come to finality in the previous assessment year. 4. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal.