C-10 Mumbai v. Mrs Rukmani V.suryanshi

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTIONINCOME TAX APPEAL NO.800 OF 2007 The Commissioner of Income Tax 23 .. AppellantC-10 MumbaiVs. Mrs Rukmani V.Suryanshi...Respondent Mr.Vimal Gupta for AppellantNone for Respondent P.C. CORAM : Dr.S.Radhakrishnan andA.V.Nirgude, JJDATE : 4th July, 2008 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant. Noneappears for the respondents though served. 2. By the above appeal, the appellant is seekingto raise the following substantial questions oflaw: (i) Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case and in law, theHon’ble Tribunal is right in directing toreduce the percentage of commission to betaken as 1.5 % instead of 6 % taken byassessing officer on the basis of analogywith other parties who were engaged insimilar business of providingaccommodation bill to the same group ? 3. We have also perused the tribunal’s judgment dt. 31.9.06. Especially for the reasons statedin para 9 it appears that the tribunal has only exercised its discretion and fixed the commissionof 1.5 % taking into account all the factors andcircumstances. There is no substantial questionof law involved in the above appeal. Hence,appeal stands dismissed. { A.V.Nirgude, J } { Dr.S.Radhakrishnan, J } { Dr.S.Radhakrishnan, J } { Dr.S.Radhakrishnan, J }