IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 1168 OF 2008. INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 1168 OF 2008. INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 1168 OF 2008. The Commisioner of Income-tax, Mumbai. ..Appellant. Vs. Late Shri Bachhubhai M Shah. ..Respondent. Mr A. S. Shivsaran, Advocate for the Appellant. Mr Sharan Jagtiani with Mr Azizkhan i/b Divya Shah & Associate for the Respondent. CORAM: Dr.S. RADHAKRISHNAN CORAM: Dr.S. RADHAKRISHNAN CORAM: Dr.S. RADHAKRISHNAN AND V.C.DAGA, JJ. AND V.C.DAGA, JJ. AND V.C.DAGA, JJ. DATED: 5th DECEMBER, 2008. DATED: 5th DECEMBER, 2008. DATED: 5th DECEMBER, 2008. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: ---- ---- ---- 1. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondent. 2. In the above appeal, the appellant is seeking to raise the following substantial question of law: 1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in admitting the facts that the distribution of assets of the H.U.F. on total or partition does not amount to transfer by virtue of provisions of Section 47 (1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and confirming that the Assessee was not liable to pay any capital gain thereby deciding the issue in favour of the Assessee? 3. The Tribunal has recorded reasons in paragraph 7 of the order dated 13.11.2007, as under: "We have considered the submissions made by both the sides, material on record and orders of authorities below. Admittedly, the entire capital gain has been taxed on substantive basis in the hands of Shri Harish H. Shah. The distribution of assets by the HUF on total or partial partition does not amount to transfer by virtue of provisions of section 47 (i), hence, we decide this issue in favour of the assessee and dismiss both the grounds of the Revenue." 4. In view of the finding of fact, there is no substantial question of law involved in the present appeal. We do not find any case made out for admission of the above appeal. Appeal is, therefore, dismissed. (V.C. DAGA,J) (V.C. DAGA,J) (V.C. DAGA,J) (DR S. RADHAKRISHNAN,J) (DR S. RADHAKRISHNAN,J) (DR S. RADHAKRISHNAN,J)