M/S Mansukhani Builders v. The Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax, Sr-10
High Court
17 Sep 2008 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
M/S Mansukhani Builders v. The Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax, Sr-10
Date of order
17 Sep 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In M/S Mansukhani Builders v. The Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax, Sr-10, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 21 OF 2006
M/s Mansukhani Builders
Versus
The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, SR-10
).. Appellant
).. Respondent
Mr A K Jasani for the Appellant.
CORAM:SWATANTER KUMAR, C. J.&A. P. DESHPANDE, J.DATED: 17TH SEPTEMBER 2008.
P.C.
We have heard the learned Counsel appearing for theAppellant. The legality and validity of the order of the Tribunal dated 3[rd]June 2005 is questioned in the present Appeal. The argument raisedon behalf of the Appellant is that in accordance with law, the assesseewas not required to prove the source and he has discharged his onus bydemonstrating that the money actually had come from the sourcedeclared. Firstly, there is no question of law in this case. Secondly, theTribunal has come to a finding of fact that the transactions were notgenuine and even the person from whom money was borrowed like Mr
Ahuja categorically stated that this was a benami transaction thoughrelated to a different assessment year. Be that as it may, even similarare the findings recorded by the Assessing Officer as well as theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal. The mere fact that the AppellateAuthority has taken a different view would be no reason for this Court tointerfere on finding of fact. No question of law arises. Appeal dismissed.
CHIEF JUSTICE
A. P. DESHPANDE, J.
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.