Itta/457/2010 Of Melody Multimedia Pvt. Ltd v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAOANDTHE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN ITTA No.457 of 2010 Dated:09.08.2010 Between: Melody Multimedia Pvt.Ltd. …Appellant and Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax,Circle-13 (1), Hyderabad. …Respondent THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAOANDTHE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN ITTA No.457 of 2010 JUDGMENT:(per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ramesh Ranganathan) This appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961(the Act) is preferred against the order of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Hyderabad Bench, in ITA No.700/Hyd/2005, dated05.06.2009 to the limited extent, the Tribunal upheld the order of theCommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), with regards Rs.2,19,960/-,which was credited to the assessee’s bank account. The Tribunal, in the order under appeal, notes that, the saidamount of Rs.2,19,960/- was found to be credited in the assessee’saccount with Global Trust Bank; since the assessee could not explainthis deposit, the Assessing Officer had added the same to the totalincome under Section 68 of the Act; before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) it was contended that the said amount wasdeposited out of the cash balance of Rs.2,19,960/-, which wasreflected in the cash book; the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)did not accept the contention on the ground that the cash book was notproduced for verification and, further, there was no explanation for thesource of the cash in the cash book. The Tribunal examined the rival contentions urged before it, bothon behalf of the assessee and the revenue, and observed that thoughthe assessee’s Counsel had drawn their attention to page 3 of thepaper book to contend that the cash book was produced forverification, it did not find any clear indication that the cash book wasindeed produced before either of the lower authorities; further, therewas no reply to the contention of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) regarding the source of cash in the cash book remainingunexplained and, in such circumstances, the Tribunal did not considerit worthwhile to remit the matter back for verification more so, as thematter was quite old, and the time and energy that may be consumedfurther may be disproportionate to the amount involved. Before us, Sri A.V.Krishna Kaundinya, learned Counsel for theappellant-assessee, contends that, since the cash book was producedbefore the Tribunal for verification, the Tribunal ought to haveremanded the matter back to the Assessing Authority to causeverification of the cash book in order to ascertain whether or not thesource of cash balance of Rs.2,19,960/- was reflected therein. Learned Counsel would submit that the Tribunal, being the final factfinding authority, ought to have either examined the cash book itself orought to have remanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer forverification. We must express our inability to interfere with the order of theTribunal as the finding recorded by it, that the appellant-assessee didnot furnish any reply to the contention of the Commissioner of IncomeTax (Appeals) regarding the source of cash in the cash bookremaining unexplained, can neither be said to be perverse or to bebased on no evidence. Even in the grounds of appeal filed in theappeal before us the source of cash, for the cash balance in the cashbook for Rs.2,19,960/-, has not been explained. In the absence of thesource of cash being explained, the authorities were justified intreating it as undisclosed income, and bringing the same to the taxunder Section 68 of the Act. No question of law arises forconsideration in this appeal. The appeal fails and is, accordingly, dismissed. 09.08.2010vs __________________(V.V.S.RAO, J) ______________________________(RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J)