(-1-) MGN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.63 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income Tax...Appellant Vs. Arthur Andersen & Co.........Respondents Mr. A.D. Kango with Mr. P.S.Sahadevan for the Appellant. Mr. S.E. Dastur, Senior Counsel with Mr. Jitendra Jain, Mr. Ricabchand and Mr. R. Suvarna i/b. D.S.K. Legal for the Respondent. CORAM: F.I. CORAM: F.I. CORAM: F.I. REBELLO REBELLO REBELLO & R.S.MOHITE,JJ. R.S.MOHITE,JJ. R.S.MOHITE,JJ. DATED: 11TH MARCH,2008 DATED: 11TH MARCH,2008 DATED: 11TH MARCH,2008 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: . The Revenue has preferred this Appeal on the following question of law:- "(A). Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and law the I.T.A.T. was justified in confirming the order of CIT (A) in deleting the addition of Rs.9,47,13,359/- made by A.O. on account of reimbursement of establishment costs even though the said expenditure is not made wholly and exclusively for the professional purpose." 2. The Appeal is in respect of assessment year 2000-2001. The Tribunal in its order dated 28th (-2-) February, 2007 had relied on its earlier order in respect of assessment year 1997-98 and 1998-99. 3. In so far as Appeal preferred for the year 1998-99 Revenue had approached this Court by Income Tax Appeal No.177 of 2008. For the reasons given therein we have dismissed the said Appeal. For the same reasons the question of law as framed in this Appeal would not arise and consequently Appeal dismissed. (R.S.MOHITE, J.) (R.S.MOHITE, J.) (R.S.MOHITE, J.) (F.I.REBELLO, J.) (F.I.REBELLO, J.) (F.I.REBELLO, J.)