hvn 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. 387 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income Tax ... Appellant The Commissioner of Income Tax ... Appellant The Commissioner of Income Tax ... Appellant Versus M/s. Graur & Weil (I) Ltd. ... Respondent Mr. Sureshkukar for the Appellant. None for Respondent. CORAM: F.I. REBELLO, & CORAM: F.I. REBELLO, & CORAM: F.I. REBELLO, & R.S. MOHITE, JJ. R.S. MOHITE, JJ. R.S. MOHITE, JJ. DATED: JANUARY 09, 200 DATED: JANUARY 09, 200 DATED: JANUARY 09, 2009 P.C. P.C. P.C. . Against the order of C.I.T. (Appeals) the Revenue has preferred an appeal before the Tribunal. The Commissioner (Appeals) has recorded a finding of fact that the assessee was carrying on business of financing. This finding of fact was confirmed by the I.T.A.T. The tribunal also noted that A.O. himself in the assessment order has recorded that against the loan of Rs.370/-lacs. the assessee company was successful in recovering the loan except for Rs.73,73,747/- and as such claim was established by the assessee. In our opinion, once the assessee company is held to be carrying on business of financing, the findings recorded by the C.I.T. (Appeals) and I.T.A.T. cannot be faulted with. The questions of law as framed would not arise. Consequently appeal dismissed. (R.S. MOHITE, J.) (R.S. MOHITE, J.) (R.S. MOHITE, J.) (F.I. REBELLO,J.) (F.I. REBELLO,J.) (F.I. REBELLO,J.)