Itxa/300/2008 Of Athe Commissioner Of Income-Tax-Central -Ii,Mum v. Hindustan Construction Co.l Td

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTIONINCOME TAX APPEAL NO.300 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income TaxCentral-II....Appellant Hindustan Construction Co.Ltd....Respondent. --- Mr.B.M.Chatterjee, for appellant.Mr.S.M.Shah, for Respondent. CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH & J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED: 8[th] August, 2008. P.C.:- 1.Heard the learned Counsel appearing forappellant. The tribunal has held that during the year1999-2000 the claim was disallowed on the same groundand in the same situation. That decision was reversedby the appellate authority. The tribunal was not shown anything different during the subsequent yearso as to enable it to take a view different than theone taken by the appellate authority in theproceedings relating to the previous assessment year,and therefore, the tribunal has recorded the findingthat the payment made was genuine. The other question is about cash of Rs.17lakhs which, according to the department, isunexplained cash. Perusal of the order of thetribunal shows that the tribunal has relied on theaccount books which were maintained at the site.The only submission made in that regard by thelearned Counsel is that the entries in the accountbooks maintained at the site about sending of cash toHead office at Bombay was subsequently made, but thelearned Counsel is not able to point out anythingfrom record to support that submission. In ouropinion, no question of law arises. The appeal istherefore, rejected. (D.K.DESHMUKH, J.) 3 (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.)