2012-VIL-783-GUJ-DT

GUJARAT HIGH COURT

TAX APPEAL NOS. 2500 to 2505 OF 2009

Date: 07.02.2012

HIREN VASANTLAL SHAH

Vs

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

R.K. Patel for the Appellant.
Manav A. Mehta for the Respondent.

BENCH

BHASKAR BHATTACHARYA, J.B. PARDIWALA, JJ.

JUDGMENT

Bhaskar Bhattacharya, Actg. CJ. –

This Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act is at the instance of the assessee and is directed against the order dated 19th June 2009 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, D-Bench, Ahmedabad in Income Tax Appeal No.2656/Ahd/2006 for the Assessment Year 1998-99, by which, the Tribunal affirmed the order passed by the CIT Appeal.

2. The following facts are not in dispute.

The department carried out a search under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act on 24th July 2003 at the residence premises of the assessee. Certain documents were found from the residence. One of such documents was in Annexure 'BS-1' having two pages numbering 23 and 24. Those papers contained working of interest @ 3% per month on total sum of Rs.3 lac. The assessee was directed to explain the contents of the document during the course of search. The reply of the assessee was that those papers were found from his father's drawer who was aware of such document and he did not know anything about it.

3. The Assessing Officer, during the course of assessment proceedings, confronted the father of the assessee who denied having any knowledge of the said papers. His statement was recorded under Section 131 of the Act and the Assessing Officer, thereafter, confronted the assessee vide order dated 8th February 2006 and asked the assessee to explain why Rs.3 lac and interest thereon should not be taxed in respect of the said year.

4. In response thereto, the assessee again repeated his version that its contents are rough working and no loan was given out. The Assessing Officer, however, did not believe the contention of the assessee because the working of the interest on the said two sheets of paper was neatly typed and it showed interest from month to month. The assessee could not explain as to why interest working had been charged from 1st October 1997 to 30th June 2002 and compounded monthly. The Assessing Officer, thereafter, mentioned that the assessee was involved in the business of financing, that is to say, cheque discounting as well as giving loans against security of cheques and again as no name was mentioned in the said paper, the same clearly indicated that on 1st October 1997 finance was given to somebody and the same was recovered on 30th June 2002.

5. On the basis of the aforesaid finding, the Assessing Officer brought to tax the principal amount of Rs.3 lac in the Financial Year 1997-98 relevant to the Assessment Year 1998-99 and interest thereon in respect of the Assessment Year.

6. Being dissatisfied, the assessee preferred appeal before the CIT Appeal but the said appellate authority affirmed the order passed by the Assessing Officer.

7. Being dissatisfied, the assessee preferred further appeal before the Tribunal below and by the order impugned herein, the Tribunal has affirmed the order of the authorities below.

8. Being dissatisfied, the present Appeal has been preferred.

9. After hearing the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and after going through the aforesaid materials on record, we find that the authorities below, on the basis of the aforesaid materials recovered during the search, rightly had drawn the presumption in terms of Section 292C of the Act.

10. The findings recorded by the Tribunal are based on appreciation of evidence on record and any reasonable individual, having regard to Section 3 of the Evidence Act, would arrive at the same conclusion as arrived at by the Tribunal below. The aforesaid finding cannot be said to be one based on 'No Evidence' nor can that finding be described as a perverse finding of fact justifying interference within the narrow scope of Section 260A of the Act.

11. We, thus, dismiss this Appeal summarily.

So far as other Appeals are concerned, here, the question of interest imposed by the authorities on the basis of the document mentioned in the appeal disposed of above, are the subject matter, and in view of our aforesaid finding, we dismiss these Appeals also as no substantial question of law is involved.

 

DISCLAIMER: Though all efforts have been made to reproduce the order accurately and correctly however the access, usage and circulation is subject to the condition that VATinfoline Multimedia is not responsible/liable for any loss or damage caused to anyone due to any mistake/error/omissions.