Ita/332/2002 Of Thecommissioner Of Income Tax v. K.venkiteswara Iyer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 28TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 9TH PHALGUNA 1929 ITA.No. 332 of 2002() --------------------- ITA.5/1998 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH .................... APPELLANT/RESPONDENT: ---------------------- THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COCHIN. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL,GOI(TAXES) SRI.GEORGE K. GEORGE, SC FOR IT RESPONDENTS: APPELLANT: ----------------------- K.VENKITESWARA IYER, PULIPRA MADAM, N.F.G.ROAD, TRIPUNITHURA. BY ADV. SRI.T.M.SREEDHARAN THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR JJ. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~I.T.A No.332 of 2002~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Dated this the 28[th] day of February, 2008 J U D G M E N T C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. In the appeal the first question raised is whether the tribunalwas justified in modifying the income estimated towards profit onpurchase and sale of a land. Next question raised also pertainsestimation of profit towards brokerage. The Tribunal afterconsidering evidence found that respondent/assessee was only actingas broker in the land deal and has got only commission. Thedocuments seized by the Assessing Officer only show that assesseeentered into an agreement for purchase and also agreement for saleand that the assessee has not purchased and sold any land in his ownaccount. We therefore, do not find any question of law arising fromorder of the Tribunal the decision of which is based on evidence. Wetherefore dismiss the appeal as devoid of any merit. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,Judge T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,Judge