1 itxa-1205-11 Ladda IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) No. 1205 of 2011 The Commissioner of Income-tax - Mumbai ... Appellant. Versus M/s Pharmacia Healthcare Ltd. ... Respondent. Mr A.K.Saxena for the appellant. Mr V. Murlidhar with Mr A.K.Jasani for the respondent. CORAM : J.P. Devadhar & A.R. Joshi, JJ. DATE : 28th November,2011. P.C. :- 1. Whether the ITAT was justified in holding that the reopening of the assessment beyond four years from the end of the relevant assessment year was without jurisdiction is the question raised in this appeal. 2. The assessment year involved herein is the AY-1998-1999. 3. In the present case, the assessment for AY 1998-99 was sought to be reopened beyond four years from the end of the relevant assessment year by recording the following reasons:- “On verification of the records, it is observed that there was no 2 itxa-1205-11 Ladda loss as per books and while computing the income under Section 115JA, the following items were not added to the book profit of the assessee Company. Sr No. Description Amount 1 Provision for doubtful debts 5,76,503 2 Loss on sale of fixed assets 5,61,747 3 Provision for royalty 34,70,794 4 Provision for gratuity 43,30,000 In view of the above facts, there is sufficient cause to believe that there is failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all necessary material which has led to escapement of income, resulting in under assessment for A.Y.1998-99”. 4. The ITAT in para 6.1 of its decision has recorded a finding of fact that in the computation of income the assessee had included all the four items set out in the reasons for reopening of the assessment and accordingly held that in the facts of the present case the assessee cannot be said to have failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for the purpose of assessment and consequently the reopening of the assessment is without jurisdiction. 5. In our opinion, the decision of the ITAT is based on facts. No question of law arises from the order of the ITAT. Hence, the appeal is dismissed. (A.R.Joshi,J) (J.P.Devadhar,J.)