Shyam Sundar Prasad v. Commi.of Income Tax-1 & Anr

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNAMiscellaneous Appeal No.655 of 2007 ====================================================== Shyam Sundar Prasad .... .... Appellant/s Versus Commi.Of Income Tax-1 & Anr .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. D.V. Pathy For the Respondent/s : Mr. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVA KIRTI SINGHand HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVA KIRTI SINGH) Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the 7. 30-03-2012 Income Tax department. The substantial question of law submitted before us is-“whether the Tribunal was correct in law in not considering the disclosure of commission in the year of its receipt prior to issuance of notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act?”. To appreciate the issue raised before us and for finding out whether it is a substantial questions of law or even a questions of law or not, we have gone through the order of the Tribunal under appeal as well as order of assessment and first appellate order passed by Commissioner Income Tax („A‟) Muzaffarpur. According to learned counsel for the appellant the actual amounts of commission which were added as income for the assessment years 1994-95, 1995-96, and 1996-97 were not reflected in the returns filed by the assessee pursuant to notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act because those amounts were, as per claim of assessee, received later during assessment year 1997-98. This issue has been considered in paragraph 4 and 7 of the order under appeal passed by the Tribunal and has been answered with a finding that the aforesaid claim is without any substance. The first appellate authority, the Commissioner was also not shown any material in support of such a claim and in fact the Commissioner as well as the Assessing Officer have given findings of fact against the appellant on the basis of letter dated 30.11.1999 sent to The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Darbhanga by the Controller (Finance) Sahara. That letter has been extracted in paragraph 6 of the order passed by the Tribunal and it clearly states that the amounts in question were paidas commission to Shri Shayam Sundar during the FY 1993-94, 1994-95 and 1995-96. If the said information was vague or incorrect, it was for the appellant to obtain clarification from Sahara India in support of his contention that the amounts were actually paid in the assessment year 1997-98. In support of such factual claim no material was produced by the appellant except self serving statement which can be treated only as a claim. The issue is actually an issue of fact which is covered by concurrent findings of the authorities. Since no substantial questions of law arises for determination in this appeal, the same is dismissed at the stage of Order 41 Rule 11 C.P.C. (Shiva Kirti Singh, J) Fahad./- (Vikash Jain, J)