: 1 : 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.1045 OF 2007 TAX APPEAL NO.1045 OF 2007 TAX APPEAL NO.1045 OF 2007 The Commissioner of Income Tax, . Central-III, Mumbai ...Appellant V/s. United Liner Agencies, Mumbai ...Respondent Ms.P.P. Bhosale, Advocate, for the Appellant. Mr.U.I. Dalal, Advocate, for the Respondent. CORAM CORAM CORAM : DR. S. RADHAKRISHNAN & : DR. S. RADHAKRISHNAN & : DR. S. RADHAKRISHNAN & A.V. A.V. A.V. NIRGUDE, JJ. NIRGUDE, JJ. NIRGUDE, JJ. DATE DATE DATE : 10TH JULY, 2008. : 10TH JULY, 2008. : 10TH JULY, 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. : : : . Heard the learned Counsel for the Appellant and the learned Counsel for the Respondent. 2. In the above Appeal, the question of law reads as under :- ". Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon’ble ITAT was not correct in holding that the initiation of proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was bad in law for Assessment year 1992-1993 and therefore quashing the assessments made in : 2 : consequence to such proceedings?" 3. We are unable to understand at all as to what is the substantial question of law involved in the above Appeal. The question of law framed is totally vague and incomprehensive. Hence, the Appeal stands dismissed. [A.V. [A.V. [A.V. NIRGUDE, J.] [DR. S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.] NIRGUDE, J.] [DR. S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.] NIRGUDE, J.] [DR. S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.]