K.J. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.224 OF 2005 WITH INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1114 OF 2004 The CIT-9 Mumbai ..Appellant Versus M/s.Aditya Construction & Respondents Developers Pvt.Ltd., ---- Mr.P.S.Sahadevan for the appellant. Mr.A.Vissanji & S.J.Mehta for the respondents. ---- Coram : F.I.Rebello & R.S.Mohite,JJ Coram : F.I.Rebello & R.S.Mohite,JJ Coram : F.I.Rebello & R.S.Mohite,JJ Date : 26th March, 2008. PC 1. Revenue has filed appeal against the order of ITAT which was confirmed by the order passed by the CIT (Appeals). The contention of the assessee was that the loss to be incurred for construction of the court house is not a contingent liability. Tribunal noted that the assessee was bound to construct the ‘court house’ for which the rate was already decided by the Government which was very low in comparison to prevailing cost of construction. The Tribunal concurred with the finding of fact recorded by the Commissioner (Appeals). 2. In our opinion, no question of law would arise and consequently appeal stands dismissed. (R.S.Mohite,J) (F.I.Rebello,J) (R.S.Mohite,J) (F.I.Rebello,J) (R.S.Mohite,J) (F.I.Rebello,J)