(1) 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.403 OF 2006. The Commissioner of Income-Tax-I. ..Appellant. Versus Versus Versus Sakegaon Investment (P) Ltd. ..Respondent. .... Mr.Vimal Gupta, for the Appellant. .... CORAM : BILAL NAZKI & CORAM : BILAL NAZKI & CORAM : BILAL NAZKI & S.S. SHINDE, JJ. S.S. SHINDE, JJ. S.S. SHINDE, JJ. DATE : 4TH JULY, 2008. DATE : 4TH JULY, 2008. DATE : 4TH JULY, 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned Advocate for the appellant. The questions of law have been seen. 2. The finding of the Tribunal is that the transaction, which was the subject matter of the dispute, was not decided within the meaning of section 269SS of the Income Tax Act, and therefore, there was no question of penalty under section 271B. 3. In view of this finding of the Tribunal, I do not find that the questions framed fall for reconsideration. The appeal is dismissed. [ BILAL NAZKI, J.] [ BILAL NAZKI, J.] [ BILAL NAZKI, J.] (2) [ S.S.SHINDE, J.] [ S.S.SHINDE, J.] [ S.S.SHINDE, J.]