( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.988 OF 2008 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.988 OF 2008 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.988 OF 2008 The CIT .. Appellant Vs. Shri.Devji Nenshi Palani .. Respondent Mr.A.S.Shivsharan for the Appellant. Mr.K.Gopal for the Respondent. CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & S.J.KATHAWALLA, JJ. S.J.KATHAWALLA, JJ. S.J.KATHAWALLA, JJ. DATE : 25th September, 2008 DATE : 25th September, 2008 DATE : 25th September, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. In this Appeal, the Appellant is seeking to raise four questions of law as mentioned in Paragraph No.4 of the Appeal Memo. Perused the Tribunal’s order dated 15th June, 2007. 2. So far as the first question of law viz.Question (a) is concerned, the Tribunal in its order has given a finding in Paragraph No.10 that the Assessing Officer has not brought any material to prove that the salary was excessive and mere increase in salary was not a ground of disallowing u/s.40-A(2) of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal has also observed that there was no intention of avoiding tax in as much the sons as well as the assessee were showing income of high bracket taxation and therefore the order of the learned CIT (A) in deleting the disallowance u/s.40A(2) of the Act. ( 2 ) 3. So far as Questions (b), (c) & (d) are concerned, the Tribunal has given a clear finding in Paragraph No.11 of its order that there was no merit in the Appeal of the Revenue and that there was no material brought before the Tribunal to substantiate the stand of the Assessing Officer that the business premises, furniture and fixtures shown by the Assessee were used by other parties and in view thereof, the Tribunal concurred with the findings given by the CIT (A). 4. In view of the above, we find that the Appeal does not involve any substantial question of law, but it is based on finding of facts. Hence, the Appeal stands dismissed. (S.J.KATHAWALLA, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) (S.J.KATHAWALLA, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) (S.J.KATHAWALLA, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.)