Ita/151/2012 Of Omana Amma v. Income Tax Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN TUESDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2017/4TH ASWINA, 1939 ITA.No. 151 of 2012 ----------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN ITA 647/2010 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH DATED 19.04.2012 ------- APPELLANT/ASSESSEE: -------------------------- SMT.OMANA AMMA PROP. M/S.OMANA ELECTRONICS, KACHERI JUNCTION,KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM. BY ADVS.SRI.K.ANAND (A.201) SMT.LATHA KRISHNAN RESPONDENT/REVENUE: ---------------------------- INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KARBALA JUNCTION, KOLLAM,RAILWAY STATION ROAD, PIN-691001. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES) BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.MUHAMED RAFIQ THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26-09-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC & ANU SIVARAMAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------I. T. Appeal No.151 of 2012 ------------------------------------------------Dated this the 26[th ]day of September, 2017 JUDGMENT Anu Sivaraman, J. 1. aThe assessee has filed this appeal challenging theorder of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 19.04.2012 inI.T.A. No.647/Coch/2010 in respect of the Assessment Year2007-08. 2. The issues raised before the appellate Tribunal were withregard to the credits received by the assessee to the extent of`12,60,600/- which was claimed as agricultural income in respectof the Assessment Year 2006-07. Further credit of an amount of`8,50,000/- which was claimed by the assessee to have beenreceived from her husband Shri G.Thankappan Pillai as the loanwas also considered by the appellate Tribunal. 3. After considering the contentions advanced by theassessee as well as the departmental representative, the I. T. Appeal No.151 of 2012 appellate Tribunal came to the conclusion that the assessee hadnot disclosed any agricultural income in respect of theAssessment Year 2006-07 in the income tax returns. Though therepresentative of the assessee had claimed that vouchers hadbeen produced showing that agricultural income had beenobtained for the Assessment Year 2006-07, in view of the factthat there is no such disclosure in the return filed by the assesseein respect of the relevant assessment year, the appellate Tribunalcame to the conclusion that the claim raised by the assesseecould not be accepted. 4. With respect to the loan of `8,50,000/- from Shri G.Thankappan Pillai also, the appellate Tribunal considered thecontentions raised on either side and noticed that there was noentry for withdrawal of the said amount in the accounts of Shri G.Thankappan Pillai. In view of the said fact, it was held that theassessee was unable to establish withdrawal of money by ShriG.Thankappan Pillai from his capital account and therefore, theclaim made by the assessee could not be accepted. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as I. T. Appeal No.151 of 2012 the learned Senior Counsel for the Revenue. 6. After going through the order of the Tribunal and hearingthe learned counsel for the appellant, we are of the opinion thatthe findings of the appellate Tribunal in the order under appealare purely findings of fact. We are also of the opinion that nosubstantial questions of law arises for consideration in the appeal.The appeal, therefore, fails and is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- JUDGE ANTONY DOMINIC Sd/- JUDGE ANU SIVARAMAN kns/- //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE