D.b. Income Tax Appeal v. Shri Madho Lal Bangard

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHANAT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR D.B. Income Tax Appeal No.361/ 2011Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur vs. Shri Madho Lal Bangard Date of Judgment : 11.08.2014 HON'BLE THE ACTI NG CHI EF JUSTI CE MR.SUNI L AMBW ANIHON'BLE MR. JUSTI CE VEERENDR SI NGH SI RADHANA Mr. K.R.Sharma, OIC on behalf of appellant-Department. This income tax appeal, under Section 260A of the I ncomeTax Act, 1961, arises out of order dated 13.04.2011 passed bythe Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench 'B', Jaipur, bywhich it has allowed the appeal of assessee and dismissed theappeal of the Department, for the assessment years 1997-98 to2003-04. The appeal of the assessee was allowed upholding theobjections in confirming the addition of Rs.19,13,184/ - in theaccount of assessee. The Tribunal found that out of the totaladdition of Rs.53,82,768/ -, the A.O. was not justified in deletingthe addition of Rs.34,69,584/ -. The Income Tax Department has preferred this appeal onthe following questions of law: “(1)Whether the Tribunal was justified inconfirming the deletion of RS.34,69,584/ - as against theaddition of Rs.53,82,768/ - made by the AssessingOfficer, ignoring that the addition was made on thebasis of entries recorded in the books of accounts ofM/ s. Ashish International Group and after recording thefinding that Shri B.S.Bhandari, in whose name theentries were appearing, was a Benami of the assessee? (2) Whether the Tribunal was justified inconfirming the deletion of Rs.34,69,584/ - as against theaddition of Rs.53,82,768/ - made by the assessingOfficer, ignoring that the addition was made on thebasis of entries recorded in the books of accounts of M/ s. Ashish International Group and without discussingand deciding the grounds raised by the department? (3)Whether the Tribunal was right in allowingfurther relief of Rs.8,50,000/ - being credit entry ofRs.3,50,000/ - and Rs.5,00,000/ - in the name of ShriMukesh (PC), deposit the fact that the assessee failed toexplain the same and Shri Bhandari was Benami of theassessee? (4)Whether on the facts and circumstances ofthe case, the finding of the Tribunal is perverse,contrary to the record and untenable in the eye of law?” We have gone through the orders passed by the ACIT andCIT(A). The findings recorded by the Tribunal are findings of factwhich do not rise any question of law, much less substantialquestions of law for consideration of this Court. The appeal, thus,does not call for interference under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Accordingly, the appeal stands dismissed. ( VEERENDR SI NGH SI RADHANA) ,J. ( SUNI L AMBW ANI ) ,ACTI NG C.J. Mohit S/ 1 All corrections made in the judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order being emailed.Mohit Tak, P.A.