1 rpa 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. 333 OF 2006 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 333 OF 2006 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 333 OF 2006 The Commissioner of Income Tax-9 .. Appellant V/s. M/s.Phase Holding Pvt.Ltd.,Mumbai .. Respondent Mr.Vinod Gupta for the Appellant. None for the Respondent. CORAM : BILAL NAZKI AND CORAM : BILAL NAZKI AND CORAM : BILAL NAZKI AND S.S.SHINDE, JJ. S.S.SHINDE, JJ. S.S.SHINDE, JJ. DATE : 20TH JUNE, 2008. DATE : 20TH JUNE, 2008. DATE : 20TH JUNE, 2008. P.C.:- P.C.:- P.C.:- . This Appeal is filed by the Department against an order by the Appellate Tribunal dated 23rd December, 2005 in an Appeal against the said order. The question of law framed in paragraph 4(a) by the department is as under : a) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Hon’ble Tribunal was right in rejecting the appeal of the department on the 2 assumption that the valuation is done by the department was purely on estimate basis when in fact the valuation is done on the basis of material supplied by the assessee and the same is based on various submissions / details furnished by the assessee. 2. We have gone through the records. We have also heard the learned Counsel appearing for the Department and we find that there is no question of law involved, as a matter of fact question relate to amounts that were spent by the assessee for the construction. The department did not produce the books of account, estimated value on the basis of information received by the department either from the assessee or from the other sources. 3. In this view of the matter, the Appeal is not maintainable and is dismissed. (BILAL NAZKI, J.) (BILAL NAZKI, J.) (BILAL NAZKI, J.) (S.S.SHINDE, J.) (S.S.SHINDE, J.) (S.S.SHINDE, J.)