IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 2971 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income-tax. ... Appellant. V/s. Shri Kishorebhai K. Patel. ... Respondent. Suresh Kumar i/b. Anamika Malhotra for the appellant. F.V.Irani with A.K.Jasani for the respondent. CORAM : V.C.DAGA AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 1st October 2009. P.C. : Heard. Officer objections are overruled. Officer to register the appeal. Appeal is taken up for hearing by consent of parties. 2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondent. Perused appeal. 3. The first question relates to the condonation of delay in filing appeal before the Tribunal at the instance of the assessee. The Tribunal has exercised its discretion and condoned delay with which no fault can be found. 4. So far as question Nos.2 and 3 are concerned, they revolve around findings of fact based on retraction of statement made by the assessee regarding disclosure of expenses. Learned counsel for the appellant- revenue categorically stated that there is no independent evidence to support the plea of the Revenue that the expenses were inflated. No fault can be found with the view taken by the Tribunal. 5. Question Nos.4 and 5 revolve around findings of fact recorded by the Tribunal based on appreciation of evidence. The view taken by the Tribunal is a reasonable and possible view. No perversity could be demonstrated by the learned counsel for the Revenue. 6. In this view of the matter, appeal is dismissed for want of substantial question of law with no order as to costs. (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) (V.C.DAGA J.)