[ASN] IN IN IN THE THE THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.994 OF 2007 The Commissioner of Income tax, Central III. ..Appellant. Vs. M/s. Shree Krishna Petroyarns Ltd. ..Respondent. Mr.Suresh Kumar with Mr. P.S.Sahadevan for the Appellant. Mr. P.J. Pardiwala, Sr. Counsel with Mr. S.G. Lakhani for the Respondent. CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & R.S. MOHITE, JJ. DATE : 30th March, 2009. PC : 1. Revenue has raised two questions in this appeal. However, Question A does not arise from the order of the tribunal in so far as the present assessee is concerned. 2. Only question which arises for consideration is Question B which reads as under. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon’ble Tribunal is justified in allowing the appeal of the assessee and deleting the addition of Rs.7,83,09,179/- made by the A.O., the same being the undisclosed income of the assessee for the block period and by disallowing deductions of depreciation as [ 2 ] claimed by the assessee? 2. The learned Tribunal after considering the record has arrived at a conclusion that there was mistake in the computation. For the reasons set out therein, it also came to a conclusion that it was also not the case of the revenue that the claim of the assessee was false which was the requirement in the definition "undisclosed income" introduced by the Finance Act, 2002 with retrospective effect from 1.7.1995. The relevant portion reads as under. "or any expense, deduction or allowance claimed under this Act which is found to be false". 3. Considering the clear finding recorded in Para-14, in our opinion, the question of law as framed would not arise. Consequently, appeal dismissed. ( R.S. MOHITE, J.) ( F.I. REBELLO, J.)