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 ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.3495 OF 2006 IN INCOME TAX APPEAL LODG. NO.1729 OF 2006 The Commissioner of Income TAx VI. ..Appellant. Vs. M/s. Jet Roadlines (India) Pvt. Ltd. ..Respondent. Mr.A.D.Kango with Mr.P.S.Sahadevan for the Appellant. Mr.S.J.Mehta i/by M/s. S.P. Mehta for the Respondent. CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & R.S. MOHITE, JJ. DATED : 12TH FEBRUARY,2008. PC : 1. Considering the cause shoswn, delay condoned. Office to register the appeal. (R.S. MOHITE, J.) (F.I. REBELLO, J.) 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 ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL LODG. NO.1729 OF 2006 The Commissioner of Income TAx VI. ..Appellant. Vs. M/s. Jet Roadlines (India) Pvt. Ltd. ..Respondent. Mr.A.D.Kango with Mr.P.S.Sahadevan for the Appellant. Mr.S.J.Mehta i/by M/s. S.P. Mehta for the Respondent. CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & R.S. MOHITE, JJ. DATED : 12TH FEBRUARY,2008. PC : 1. In so far as question (a) is concerned as the dues were paid within grace period, the finding of the tribunal is according to law and consequently, the question (a) would not arise. 2. In so far as question (b) is concerned, the tribunal has followed the orders of the earlier years. We have perused the order of the Commissioner (Appeals). It was affirmed by the ITAT. The claims are towards loss of damage of goods within the course of transportation. In our opinion, this would be clearly a business expenditure. In the light of that, question as framed would not arise and consequently, the appeal dismissed. (R.S. MOHITE, J.) (F.I. REBELLO, J.)