( 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.1145 OF 2008 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1145 OF 2008 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1145 OF 2008 The CIT Mumbai .. Appellant Vs. M/s.Tutkuks Restaurant P.Ltd. .. Respondent Mr.J.S.Saluja for the Appellant. None for the Respondent. CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & V.C.DAGA, JJ. V.C.DAGA, JJ. V.C.DAGA, JJ. DATE : 21st November, 2008 DATE : 21st November, 2008 DATE : 21st November, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the Appellant. None appears for the Respondent. By this Appeal, the Appellant is seeking to raise the following substantial question of law:- "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon’ble Tribunal erred in upholding the order of CIT (A) in cancelling the assessment order dated 28.2.1995 by holding that the impugned assessment order u/s.143 (3) read with Section 250 without appreciating that the order of the Hon’ble Tribunal relied upon in the order is under challenge as the revenue did not accept the same." 2. Perused an order of the Tribunal dated 21.1.2003 whereby the Tribunal has dismissed the Appeal filed by the Revenue. The Tribunal has observed that when the order passed u/s.263 stands vacated, the consequential order passed by the A.O. would automatically stand vacated. The Tribunal did not find any infirmity in the order passed by the CIT (A). The Revenue had not even objected that the ITAT ought not to hear the matter. In ( 2 ) view thereof, there is no substantial question of law involved in this Appeal. Hence, the Appeal stands dismissed. (V.C.DAGA,J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) (V.C.DAGA,J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) (V.C.DAGA,J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.)