Mahendra P. Kanakia v. The Income Tax Officer,Ward 21(1) (3), Mumbai & Anr

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 6172 OF 2010 Mahendra P. Kanakia ..... Appellant Vs. The Income Tax Officer,Ward 21(1) (3), Mumbai & Anr. ..... Respondents Mr.Aditya Sharma with Mr.V.S.Hadade for the Appellant. Mr.Abhay Ahuja for the Respondents. CORAM : DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD &R.D. DHANUKA, JJ. DATE : APRIL 25, 2012 P.C.: This Appeal arises from a decision of the Income tax Appellate Tribunal dated 11 April 2007. The Assessment Year to which the appeal relates is A.Y.1992– 93. Though several substantial questions of law have been raised, the Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the assessee has stated that the following question of law is comprehensive enough to cover the grievance of the assessee in the Appeal : Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Hon’ble ITAT was justified in confirming the addition contrary to its own finding that no addition can be sustained in the absence of corroborative evidence. 2.The dispute relates to an addition of Rs.3,67,700/- made by the Assessing Officer. The CIT (A) adverted to page 23 of file A-1 amongst the documents that were seized during the course of the search action. The CIT (A) observed that the documents clearly show as many as 14 payments. In respect of each payment, the date and mode of the payment was referred to. The Tribunal while confirming these findings observed that the details of the seized papers are specific and contain details of payments made on specific dates. 3.There is a concurrent finding of the CIT (A) and of the Tribunal on appreciation of the evidence. The finding cannot be regarded as being perverse. Hence, no question of law will arise in the Appeal. The Appeal is, therefore, dismissed. DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, J. R.D. DHANUKA, J.