In addition to the other information presented in this Annual Report, the following should be considered carefully in evaluating the Company and its business. This Annual Report contains forward-looking statements that involve riskrisks and uncertainties. The Company’s actual results may differ materially from the results discussed in the forward-looking statements. Factors that might cause such a difference include, but are not limited to, those discussed below and elsewhere in this Annual Report.

In the 2006 fiscal year, the Company completed the purchase of 1,391,860 shares of Marcus Corporation, which we refer to as "Marcus"“Marcus”, representing 98.49% of the total issued shares of Marcus. Marcus is a non-reporting Nevada corporation, which owns the Marcus mining claims, consisting of 39 unpatented lode claims and two placer claims, and which comprise a portion of the Company’s Robertson Property. By acquiring Marcus, the Company now controls Marcus and owns an indirect interest in the mining lease between the Company and Marcus, which provides for an annual advanced royalty to Marcus of US$12,000, and a 5% net smelter returns royalty up to a maximum payment of US$2.5 million.

In consideration of the acquisition, the Company issued one common share of the Company for every four common shares of Marcus, for a total of 347,964 common shares of the Company. In addition, each tendering Marcus shareholder received a non-transferable share purchase warrant, permitting such shareholders to purchase one additional common share of the Company at an exercise price of $2.00 per share for a period of up to two years from the closing date of the acquisition, for every two shares of the Company received on the share exchange.

Please refer to noteNote 6 of the financial statements (Item 17) for information regarding the Company'sCompany’s principal capital expenditures on its mineral properties.

At the AnnnualAnnual General Meeting of the Company on July 17, 2007, the shareholders of the Company passed an ordinary resolution amending the Company'sCompany’s share structure by subdividing the Company'sCompany’s issued share capital of 8,267,360 common shares without par value into 24,802,080 common shares without par value, every one common share being subdivided into three common shares, referred to as the "Subdivision"“Subdivision”.  For the purpose of this Annual Report, all amounts with respect to the Company's common shares and options do not take into account the Subdivision as it has yet to be implemented.

Operations and Principal Activities

Presently, the Company’s principal business activity is the exploration of mineral properties. The Company is in the process of exploring its mineral properties and has not yet determined whether its mineral properties contain ore reserves that are economically recoverable. There is no assurance that a commercially viable mineral deposit exists on any of the Company'sCompany’s properties, and future exploration will be required before final evaluation as to the economic and legal feasibility is determined.

The Company’s mining claims are located in the states of Nevada and California in the United States. The Company’s present principal exploration activities have been focused on the Robertson Mining Claims located in Crescent Valley, Nevada.

Effective December 30, 1999, pursuant to the terms of the Option Agreement, Cortez elected to terminate the Option Agreement. This required the Company to post its own security for the reclamation bond for the Robertson Property and obtain a full release of Placer’s guarantee of the original reclamation bond. In order to satisfy its obligations under the Option Agreement, the Company spent a large portion of fiscal year 2003 conducting reclamation on the Robertson Property to reduce its US$2,000,000 reclamation bond that Placer had guaranteed for the Company. The Company was able to obtain a release of Placer'sPlacer’s guarantee by conducting sufficient reclamation work to reduce the bonding requirement, and by raising sufficient funds to provide satisfactory alternative security of the reclamation bond. The reclamation bond was reduced to US$786,100 during the fiscal year ended 2003, for which the Company posted cash. In fiscal year ended 2006, with more reclamation work having been completed and accounted for, the reclamation bond was further reduced to US$228,205. In fiscal year ended 2007, with further drilling activities being proposed and performed, the required reclamation bond was increased to US$282,268. The costIn fiscal year ended 2008, additional planned exploration activities in Nevada were approved and the required reclamation bond was increased to the CompanyUS$319,400 and then again in fiscal year ended 2009 up to conduct the reclamation and other associated costs was approximately US$25,887 (year ended January 31, 2007) (US$263,017 since 2003).

     During 2007, the Company receivedcompleted two deep flooded reverse circulation drill holes, TV07-1 and TV07-2, to depths of 2,990 ft and 3,450 ft, respectively. The drilling was designed to test the lower plate of the Roberts Mountains thrust fault (RMTF) for high-grade Carlin-type mineralization hosted by favorable carbonate strata. TV07-1 intersected a permitthick sequence of fine grained siliceous sedimentary and volcanic rocks followed by biotite and quartz hornfels equivalents in the upper plate of the RMTF. Although the hole failed to reach the lower plate of the RMTF, it did intersect a number of narrow low-grade zones. TV07-2 was collared along a dike-filled splay of the Try fault zone and intersected a sequence of mostly fine grained siliceous sedimentary rocks and hornfels to 3,080 ft, at which point altered and mineralized limy mudstone in the lower plate was encountered. Beginning at 3,280 ft, the hole returned 200 ft of weakly to strongly anomalous gold values ranging from 0.031 to 2.190 ppm gold, including four 10-ft-thick intervals that exceed 0.01 oz Au/t.

     In the US Bureaufiscal year ending January 31, 2008, the Company purchased 100% interest in the 72 claims comprising the Fanny Komp/Elwood Wright lease which forms part of Land Management to drill four deep holes (3 – 5,000 feet) onthe core area of the Robertson Property and drilling commenced in July 2007.

12

In calendar 2006, Coral Gold’s field staff carried out programs of detailed structural geological mapping, geochemical soil sampling, gravity geophysics and airborne magnetometric interpretation to define areasFebruary 2008, the Company received the final NI 43-101 compliantMineral Resource Estimate for the deep drilling program.

     The zones included in the Beacon Hill estimate are located within the Robertson’s Core Claims only. Beacon Hill reported the following updated resource estimate:

     For details on claim and gold zone locations, please see corresponding maps and diagrams at the Company’s website atwww.coralgold.com. The information contained in the Company’s website does not form part of this Annual Report.

     Resource estimate parameters:

• Gold ounces were calculated on the basis of US$600/oz Au and 70% Au recovery.
• The 0.015 ozAu/ton cut-off grade utilized to report the resource was derived from a mining cost of US$1.02/ton, process cost of US$5.00/ton and waste cost of US$1.14/ton.
• The mineral resources in the table above were estimated using the CIM Standards on Mineral Resources and Reserves.
• The database comprised a total of 1,160 drill holes, drilled in calendar 2006 into the existing computer block model.  Meanwhile application will be made for permits for533,453 feet (162,638 metres) of drilling to further expand the Distal, 39A and Porphyry/Altenburg Hill Zones.  A series of core holes are also planned for metallurgical test work to add to existing information at101,757 gold assays.
• The inferred resource covers 6 distinct and separate areas; Distal, 39A, Gold Pan, Porphyry, Altenburg Hill, Southern Area and Porphyry/then all remaining blocks outside these areas that warrant inclusion as an inferred resource. In addition, Gold Pan, Porphyry and Altenburg Hill.

Effective December 31, 1999, the Company and Levon Resources Ltd., referred to as "Levon"“Levon”, entered into a fourth amending agreement whereby Levon could earn an undivided 50% interest in the Norma Sass and Ruf Claims upon completion of certain terms. This agreement was further amended effective December 31, 2001 (but signed on October 3, 2002), whereby Levon was transferred a 33-1/3%33.3% interest in the Company’s interest in the Norma Sass and Ruf claims, in consideration of 300,000 common shares of Levon previously issued to the Company and the prior payment of $350,294 for exploration work. The Company currently owns a 66-2/3%66.6% interest in the Norma Sass and Ruf claims (subject to certain royalties to underlying property owners, as described below), following the execution of the December 2001 fifth amending agreement with Levon.

On December 4, 2002, the Company granted an option to acquire 33-1/3%33.3% of the Company’s interest in the Norma Sass and Ruf Claims to Goldfranchise Corporation, referred to as “Goldfranchise”. In order to earn the interest, Goldfranchise was required to:

In January 2005, wethe Company announced the formation of an exploration agreement with Agnico-Eagle Mines Limited, referred to as "Agnico-Eagle"“Agnico-Eagle”. The agreement coverscovered our Norma Sass, Blue Nugget and Lander Ranch claims. The Norma Sass agreement also includesincluded our partnership with Levon. Under the agreement, Agnico-Eagle cancould earn a 51% interest in the Norma Sass, Blue Nugget and Lander Ranch claims by completing at least 45,000 feet of exploration drilling and paying certain advance royalties. At its option, Agnico-Eagle may acquire the claim leases from the underlying owners for its benefit and Agnico-Eagle shall be deemed to have earned an additional 24% interest. Agnico-Eagle will then have the option of acquiring the remaining 25% interest by producing a positive feasibility study and making a positive production decision.

Agnico-Eagle mobilized a reverse circulation drill supplied by Lang Exploratory Drilling of Elko, Nevada to the Norma Sass property on May 15, 2006. Drilling commenced on the Lander Ranch target area and Agnico-Eagle drilled 15,000 ft. in 12 to 15 holes on the Norma Sass and related properties. In February 2007, Agnico-Eagle Mines Ltd. has notified the Company that it would not be continuing its option on Company'sthe Company’s Norma Sass, Lander Ranch and Blue Nugget properties because of other corporate priorities. The Company has beenwas pleased with the work done by Agnico-Eagle during the past two years.  Theyas they successfully showed depths to the lower plate sequence across the Norma Sass ground and extended the area of gold mineralization at Lander Ranch.

     In September 2008, the Company entered into an exploration, development and mine operating agreement (the “Agreement”) with Barrick Gold Exploration Inc. (“Barrick”), wherein Barrick was granted the option to acquire up to a 75% interest in the Company’s and Levon’s interests in the Norma Sass Property, Nevada, consisting of 36 unpatented mining claims.

     Barrick may earn a 60% interest by incurring total exploration expenditures of at least US$3 million in annual installments by December 31, 2014. Barrick may earn an additional 10% (for an aggregate interest of 70%) by incurring an additional US$1.5 million by December 31, 2015. Barrick may earn an additional 5% (for an aggregate interest of 75%) by carrying the Company and Levon through to commercial production.

15

     Alternatively, at the time of earning either its 60% or 70% interest, Barrick may be given the option to buy-out the Company’s and Levon’s joint interest by paying US$6 million and granting them a 2% net smelter returns royalty.

     In May 2009, Barrick announced that plans are underway to do target delineation work in the second quarter followed by deep drilling in the third quarter on the Norma Sass property, Cortez Gold Trend, Nevada. Norma Sass is a 36-claim property immediately west of the Pipeline Mine open pit. Norma Sass was optioned to Barrick as disclosed above.

     Norma Sass’ proximity to Pipeline, offers the deep discovery potential Barrick is pursuing. They have completely remapped and reinterpreted the Pipeline open pit geology since their acquisition of Placer Dome, and have a new stratigraphic model for the host rocks and structural setting of the gold deposit.

     Barrick has notified the Company that they will commence the drilling of the planned holes in September 2009.

June Claims

     The Company announced the completion of a mineral lease with option to purchase agreement to explore, develop, and exploit six lode mining claims located in Lander County, State of Nevada (the “June Claims”). The June Claims are adjacent to the Company’s View Claims in the northwest section of its Robertson Property. The agreement is for an initial term of 4 years in consideration of the payment of an annual rent of US$25,000, renewable in successive four year terms, provided that the rent will be reviewing resultsincrease by US$5,000 every four years. The property is subject to a royalty charge of Agnico-Eagle’s exploration programs in order3% of net smelter returns (“NSR”), subject to plan further work.

The Company spent approximately $16,175$176,672 on reclamation and maintenance in fiscal year 20072009 on the Robertson Property. The Company is reclaiming past mining and exploration related disturbances to public lands as required by the Bureau of Land Management (“BLM”) and the Nevada Department of Environmental Protection referred(“NDEP”).

     In August 2008, SRK Consulting prepared an “Aerial Survey Ground Truthing and Revised Cost Estimate” Report for the Company, which following amendments and revisions was submitted to as the "Bureau".

     The report outlined and updated results of reclamation done by the Company at the Robertson Property up to 2008.

     The BLM and NDEP replied with required changes and updates in March/April 2009 and a revised “Aerial Survey Ground Truthing and Revised Cost Estimate” was prepared by SRK Consulting on June 10, 2009 and submitted to the BLM and NDEP. The Company is awaiting acceptance of the report.

     In other reclamation activity, The Company resolved confusion concerning disturbance at Mill Gulch (in the Robertson Core area) and at the Company’s JDN claims in the Hilltop area. The BLM agreed in July 2008 that the Company is not responsible for the land disturbance at Mill Gulch. The disturbance was caused by placer gold mining activity before the Company’s involvement at Robertson.

     In the Try/View area of the Robertson Property the Company renewed the Notice of Intent to allow further deep drilling. The bond covering this area was increased to approximately $37,000.

     In the core area of the Robertson Property, the Company also submitted a new “Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan” and technical report which was approved by the BLM and NDEP in June 2009.

16

     In addition the Company has authorized SRK Consulting to prepare:

     (a) Comprehensive Permit, List and Schedules (a diary of permitting requirements); and

     (b) memo of existing reclamation status and planning for further reclamation.

During the year ended January 31, 2007,2009, additional planned exploration activities were approved by the Bureau.  Therefore,BLM. Accordingly, the BureauBLM increased the amount of the required reclamation deposit to US$282,268.

The mining industry in which the Company is engaged is highly competitive. Competitors include well-capitalized mining companies, independent mining companies and other companies having financial and other resources far greater than those of the Company. The companies compete with other mining companies in connection with the acquisition of gold and other precious metal properties. In general, properties with a higher grade of recoverable mineral and/or which are more readily minable afford the owners a competitive advantage in that the cost of production of the final mineral product is lower. Thus, a degree of competition exists between those engaged in the mining industries to acquire the most valuable properties. As a result, the Company may eventually be unable to acquire attractive gold mining properties.

The Company is not dependent upon a single or few customers or suppliers for revenues or its operations.

We are subject to various federal and state laws and regulations including environmental laws and regulations. Environmental regulations impose, among other things, restrictions, liabilities and obligations in connection with the generation, handling, use, storage, transportation, treatment and disposal of hazardous substances and waste and in connection with spills, releases and emissions of various substances to the environment. Environmental regulation also requires that facility sites and other properties associated with our operations be operated, maintained, abandoned and reclaimed to the satisfaction of applicable regulatory authorities. In addition, certain types of operations, including exploration and development projects and changes to certain existing projects, may require the submission and approval of environmental impact assessments or permit applications. Compliance with environmental regulation can require significant expenditures, including expenditures for clean up costs and damages arising out of contaminated properties and failure to comply with environmental regulations may result in the imposition of fines and penalties. We believe that we are in substantial compliance with such laws and regulations. However, such laws and regulations may change in the future in a manner which will increase the burden and cost of compliance.

Certain laws and governmental regulations may impose liability on us for personal injuries, clean-up costs, environmental damages and property damages, as well as administrative, civil and criminal penalties. We maintain limited insurance coverage for sudden and accidental environmental damages, but do not maintain insurance coverage for the full potential liability that could be caused by sudden and accidental environmental damage. Accordingly, we may be subject to liability or may be required to cease production from properties in the event of such damages.

The Company’s exploration programs in Nevada and California are subject to state and federal regulations regarding environmental considerations. All operations involving the exploration for the production of minerals are subject to existing laws and regulations relating to exploration procedures, safety precautions, employee health and safety, air quality standards, pollution of streams and fresh water sources, odor, noise, dust and other environmental protection controls adopted by federal, state and local governmental authorities as well as the rights of adjoining property owners. The Company may be required to prepare and present to federal, state or local authorities data pertaining to the effect or impact that any proposed exploration for or production of minerals may have upon the environment.

17

All requirements imposed by any such authorities may be costly, time consuming and may delay commencement or continuation of exploration or production operations. Future legislation may significantly emphasize the protection of the environment, and, as a consequence, the activities of the Company may be more closely regulated to further the cause of environmental protection. Such legislation, as well as further interpretation of existing laws in the United States, may require substantial increases in equipment and operating costs to the Company and delays, interruptions, or a termination of operations, the extent of which cannot be predicted. Environmental problems known to exist at this time in the United States may not be in compliance with regulations that may come into existence in the future. This may have a substantial impact upon the capital expenditures required of the Company in order to deal with such problem and could substantially reduce earnings. At the present time, the Company’s exploration activities in Nevada are in compliance with all known environmental requirements.

The regulatory bodies that directly regulate the Company'sCompany’s activities are the Bureau of Land Management (Federal) and the Nevada Department of Environmental Protection (State).

The Company has two wholly-owned subsidiaries, Coral Energy Corporation of California, a California corporation which holds title to the Company’s California property, and Coral Resources, Inc., a Nevada corporation, which holds title to the Company’s mining claims located in Nevada. In the 2006 fiscal year, the Company completed the purchase of 1,391,860 shares, representing 98.49% of the issued shares, of Marcus, a Nevada Corporation that owns the Marcus mining claims, consisting of 39 unpatented lode claims and two placer claims, and which comprise a portion of the Company’s Robertson Property.

D. Property, Plant and Equipment

Presently, the Company is an “exploration stage company”, as all of the Company’s properties are currently in the exploratory stage of development. In order to determine if a commercially viable mineral deposit exists in any of the Company’s properties, further geological work will need to be done and a final evaluation based upon the results obtained to conclude economic and legal feasibility.

The Company’s primary focus has been on the Robertson Mining Claims, in Nevada, United States.

The Robertson Mining Claims are located in Crescent Valley, Nevada on the western flanks of the Shoshone Range, 28 miles to the southeast of Battle Mountain, Nevada, which lies some 230 miles northeast of Reno, Nevada. The Robertson Mining Claims comprise approximately 11,000 acres in the Bullion Mining District, Lander County, Nevada, and currently include 724 unpatented and patented lode and placer mining claims. The Robertson Mining Claims are recorded undercomprise three separate claim groups known as: (i) the Robertson Property;Core Claims; (ii) the Carve-Out Claims;Carve Out Claims, and (iii) the Norma Sass and Ruf Claims,Claims. as described more particularly below.

These mining claims have been acquired over a period of several years from different sources. The entire Robertson Mining Claims are subject to a 3% net smelter royalty to Geomex Development Eighth Partnership, referred to as "Geomex 8"“Geomex 8”, which royalty shall cease at such time as the sum of US$1,250,000 has been paid to Geomex 8, and various mining leases requiring minimum annual advanced royalties ranging from 2% to 8% of net smelter returns.

There is no underground or surface plant or equipment located on the Robertson Mining Claims.

The Robertson Property is the subject of twothree technical reports dated January 15, 2004, and April 25, 2006 and January 27, 2008. The first two technical reports were prepared by Robert T. McCusker, P.Geol. in accordance with NI 43-101, which we refer to as the "McCusker Reports"“McCusker Reports”. The following historical information concerningthird and most recent report was prepared by Beacon Hill of Vancouver, British Columbia referred hereinto as the “Beacon Hill Report”. The zones included in the Beacon Hill estimate are located within the Robertson’s Core claims only. The Company’s other Claim blocks, including Norma Sass, Lander Ranch, Ruf, Blue Nugget and the Excluded claims (joint ventured with Cortez Gold Mines), were not part of the estimate.

Property Description and Location

     The Robertson Property is extracted from the McCusker Reports.  The reader is referred to the entire text of the McCusker Reports, copies of which are available under the Company’s filings on EDGAR at www.sec.gov and on SEDAR at www.sedar.com.

In 2001, a boundary agreement between the Company and the Cortez resolved claim boundary overlaps and seniority issues along the east and south sides of the Robertson claim block. This agreement required both parties to amend and/or abandon certain claims in order to achieve the agreed upon boundary. This was completed during the 2002-2003 assessment year.

Approximately 17361 of the 532495 of the claims that comprise the Robertson Property are controlled by the Company through six mining leases and option agreements. The claimsCore Claims held by the Company under lease or option agreements require minimum advance royalty payments and production royalties in the event of production. Total annual payments for the various leases and minimum advance royalties are US$55,800.36,000.

     A summary compilation of the terms of these agreements are presented in the Tabletable below: