:1: [ASN] [ASN] [ASN] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.132 OF 2009 Patodia Syntex Limited. ..Appellant. Vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax-III. ..Respondent. Mr. P.R.Toprani for the Appellant. Mr. P.S.Sahadevan for the Respondent. CORAM : F.I.REBELLO & R.S.MOHITE, JJ. DATE : 2ND MARCH, 2009. PC : 1. The assessee is in appeal against the order of the Tribunal dated 26.9.2008. The question of law as framed are set out in Para-8 of the appeal. The real controversy pertains to consideration of interest received from the subsidiary company. This issue has been dealt with in Para-4 onwards by the learned Tribunal. The learned Tribunal noted that on 28.10.2004 the matter was restored to the A.O. in order to enable the assessee to establish nexus between interest received by the assessee with export business as well as interest earned, if any. On restoration of the matter to the file of the A.O., the A.O. gave an opportunity to the assessee to prove the nexus. The assessee did not furnish any material not even the books of account to show the nexus of interest with the export business. On the contrary, inability was shown to furnish any :2: documentary evidence to prove such nexus. The Tribunal noticed that no such details were provided before the CIT(A). Even before the ITAT, the learned counsel was unable to show any nexus of funds between interest received with export business as well as interest earned as was sought to be contended. The Tribu nal therefore, confirmed the finding recorded by the CIT(A). In our opinion, considering the remand by the Tribunal to the A.O. by order dated 28.10.2004 and the subsequent finding of fact, the question as sought to be argued would not arise. Consequently, appeal dismissed. (R.S. MOHITE, J.) (F.I. REBELLO, J.)