1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.886 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income Tax-1 ...Appellant vs. M/s.Neo Pharma Pvt.Ltd. ...Respondent. --- Mr.Sureshkumar, for appellant. --- CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH & J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED:29th September,2008. P.C.:- 1. Two questions are raised in this Appeal. As regards the first question is concerned, the facts are that the assessee had paid interest bearing funds of Rs.3,12,50,000/- to Gautam Enterprises for purchase of 25,000 sq.ft. built up area. As Gautam 2 Enterprises failed to hand over the property, there was dispute and the matter was referred to arbitration. There were five other parties who had entered into similar transaction with Gautam Enterprises. All these parties including the Assessee formed a partnership firm known as “Kamdhenu Constructions” for development of the property belonging to Gautam Enterprises. In the assessment year in question, the assessing officer disallowed the interest on the amount advanced by the assessee to Gautam Enterprises by invoking Section 14A of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal has given finding of fact that the amount of Rs.3,12,50,000/- was advanced to Gautam Enterprises for purchase of the property, and therefore, the interest paid on the said amount was allowable. The finding of the Tribunal is finding of fact. No question of law arises. 2. As regards the question no.2 is concerned, the Tribunal has followed its earlier decision in the case of assessee for the assessment year 1994-95 and 1995-96. There is nothing on record to show that the 3 revenue has challenged the correctness of the said decision. In this view of the matter, the second question of law cannot be said to give rise to substantial question of law. Appeal is dismissed. (D.K.DESHMUKH, J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.)