bgp bgp bgp IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME INCOME INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1085 OF 2008 TAX APPEAL NO.1085 OF 2008 TAX APPEAL NO.1085 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income Tax, ..Appellant Vs. M/s.JMP Investments Ltd. ..Respondent Mr.Vimal Gupta a/w.P.S.Sahadevan for the Appellant. Mr.S.J.Mehta for the Respondent. CORAM CORAM CORAM :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & :- DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & V.C.DAGA, V.C.DAGA, V.C.DAGA, JJ. JJ. JJ. DATE DATE DATE : 11TH DECEMBER, 2008 : 11TH DECEMBER, 2008 : 11TH DECEMBER, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. The learned Counsel for the Appellant seeking to raise the following substantial questions of law: (A) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon’ble Tribunal was justified in confirming the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in directing the Assessing Officer to treat the rental income as income from business for the purpose of computing deduction u/s.80HH even though it is not incidental to the business of the assessee? (B) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon’ble Tribunal was justified in holding that the unit II is separate undertaking and entitled for deduction under Section 80HH despite there is no separation of business ? 2. The learned Counsel for the Appellant does not press question (C). :2: 3. As far as question (A) is concerned, admittedly the same does not arise out of the order dated 21st November, 2006 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. Mr.Gupta, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Revenue is unable to point out that question of law arising out of the said order of the Tribunal. 4. So far as question (B) is concerned, in paragraph Nos.9 and 12, the Tribunal has held that even for the earlier Assessment Year, the Unit was considered as an independent unit and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has categorically given a finding that the same was an independent unit and the Tribunal has concurred with the same. The Revenue had not brought any material to contest the same even before the Tribunal. Under these circumstances, we do not find any substantial question of law involved in the above. Hence, the Appeal stands dismissed. (V.C.DAGA,J.) (V.C.DAGA,J.) (V.C.DAGA,J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.)