1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.403 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income Tax ...Appellant vs. M/s.Dodsal Pvt.Ltd. ...Respondent. --- Mr.Suresh Kumar, for appellant. Mr.P.C.Tripathi with Ms.A.Vissanji i/b. A.K.Jasani, for Respondent. CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH & J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED: 21st October,2008. P.C.:- 1. The revenue has raised four substantial questions of law which reads as under:- (a) Whether on the facts and in the 2 circumstances of the case and in law the Hon'ble ITAT was correct in deleting the disallowance of depreciation on increased cost of machinery due to foreign exchange ? (b) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Hon'ble ITAT was correct in restoring the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer in regard to disallowance of Rs.3,11,104/- under section 43B of I.T. Act,1961 ? (c) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Hon'ble ITAT was correct in holding the view that lease rent is not taxable on accrual basis on the facts of the present case. (d) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Hon'ble ITAT was correct in admitting the additional grounds of the assessee with 3 regard to his claim of depreciation in respect of leased assets which was not admitted by the CIT(A) ?” 2. As regards the question (a) is concerned, the learned Counsel appearing for appellant fairly states that the Tribunal has relied on its decision for the assessment year 1993-94 and the said decision has been accepted by the revenue. In this view of the matter, the first question raised by the revenue cannot be entertained. 3. As regards the question (b) is concerned, the matter is only restored back by the Tribunal for denovo consideration, therefore, the question raised by the appellant cannot be entertained. 4. As regards the question (c) is concerned, the finding of fact recorded by the Tribunal is that even the principal amount had become bad and therefore, lease rent received actually has to be taken into consideration for taxation and not on accrual basis. The finding recorded by the tribunal 4 is finding of fact. No question of law arises, therefore, the question raised by the appellant cannot be entertained. 5. As regards the question (d) is concerned, it is only the additional grounds allowed by the Tribunal in respect of claim of depreciation in respect of leased assets. No question of law arises. Hence, the question (d) raised by the revenue cannot be entertained. The appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs. (D.K.DESHMUKH, J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.)