K.J. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATRE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JRISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1162 OF 2005 IN INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.444 OF 2005 The CIT Mumbai ..Appellant Versus Shri Chunilal M.Shah ..Respondent ---- Mr.S.M.Shah & Mr.P.S.Sahadevan for the appellant. ---- Coram : F.I.Rebello & R.S.Mohite,JJ Coram : F.I.Rebello & R.S.Mohite,JJ Coram : F.I.Rebello & R.S.Mohite,JJ Date : 18.03.2008. PC 1. There is a delay of 216 days. 2. The learned Tribunal has confirmed the order of Commissioner (Appeals). In paragraph-4 of the order, considering the fact set out therein the Tribunal arrived at the finding that facts are not sufficient to penalise the assessee for concealment of income under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. 3. There are two concurrent finding of facts on the issue. Considering the above, questions of law as framed would not arise and consequently Motion alongwith Appeal dismissed. (R.S.Mohite,J) (F.I.Rebello,J) (R.S.Mohite,J) (F.I.Rebello,J) (R.S.Mohite,J) (F.I.Rebello,J)