1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O. O. C. J. INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.2459 OF 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax-12 Mumbai ..Appellant. Vs. M/s. Dani Wooltex Corporation ..Respondent. .... Ms Anamika Malhotra for the Appellant. Mr. Subhash S. Shetty for the Respondent. ..... CORAM : DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD & J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. 7 June 2010. P.C. : The following question of law has been formulated in the appeal by the revenue under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 : “Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified in law in deleting the addition of Rs. 34,70,263/- upheld by the CIT(A) without dealing with his findings and conclusions;” The appeal arises out of the order of the Tribunal for Assessment Year 1999-2000. We have perused the order of the 2 Tribunal. The principal issue before the Tribunal related to the valuation of the closing stock. The Tribunal noted that the stock of the assessee valued at Rs.72,32,664/- had been in the custody of the UCO Bank for between fifteen to twenty years. In these circumstances, the Tribunal observed that if the stock in the custody of the bank was excluded, the action of the Commissioner (Appeals) in restricting the value to 50% at the end of the year was not correct. The finding of the Tribunal is a finding of fact on which no substantial question of law would arise. The Appeal is accordingly dismissed. (Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, J.) (J.P. Devadhar, J.)