IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME INCOME INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.800 OF 2007 TAX APPEAL NO.800 OF 2007 TAX APPEAL NO.800 OF 2007 The Commissioner of Income Tax 23 .. Appellant C-10 Mumbai Vs. Mrs Rukmani V.Suryanshi ... Respondent Mr.Vimal Gupta for Appellant None for Respondent CORAM CORAM CORAM : Dr.S.Radhakrishnan and : Dr.S.Radhakrishnan and : Dr.S.Radhakrishnan and A.V.Nirgude, A.V.Nirgude, A.V.Nirgude, JJ JJ JJ DATE DATE DATE : : : 4th July, 2008 4th July, 2008 4th July, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant. None appears for the respondents though served. 2. By the above appeal, the appellant is seeking to raise the following substantial questions of law: (i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon’ble Tribunal is right in directing to reduce the percentage of commission to be taken as 1.5 % instead of 6 % taken by assessing officer on the basis of analogy with other parties who were engaged in similar business of providing accommodation bill to the same group ? 3. We have also perused the tribunal’s judgment dt. 31.9.06. Especially for the reasons stated in para 9 it appears that the tribunal has only 2 exercised its discretion and fixed the commission of 1.5 % taking into account all the factors and circumstances. There is no substantial question of law involved in the above appeal. Hence, appeal stands dismissed. { A.V.Nirgude, J } A.V.Nirgude, J } A.V.Nirgude, J } { Dr.S.Radhakrishnan, J } Dr.S.Radhakrishnan, J } Dr.S.Radhakrishnan, J }