The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 25, Mumbai v. Haresh Ramanlal Soni

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.6039 OF 2010 The Commissioner of Income Tax – 25, Mumbai..Appellant. Versus Haresh Ramanlal Soni..Respondent. Mr.Suresh Kumar for the appellant.Mr.S.C. Tiwari with Ms.Meghana Butala for the respondent. CORAM : J.P. Devadhar &A.R. Joshi, JJ. P.C. : DATE : 8[th] November 2011 1.The question of law raised by the Revenue in this appeal reads thus : “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in allowing the assessee’s appeal in respect of addition made on account of unexplained cash credits under Section 68 of Rs.14,50,000/- and corresponding interest of Rs.2,18,850/- without appreciating the fact the alleged loan deposits have no creditworthiness and the assessee has not discharged his onus of proving the alleged loan deposits for cross verification ?” 2.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in para-10 of its order has recorded a finding that the assessee has successfully furnished the primary details with regard to the identity of the depositors and also their creditworthiness. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has held that on the basis of the documents furnished by the assessee, the additions made by the assessing officer cannot be sustained. No materials are placed on record and no arguments are advanced to the effect that the decision of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is perverse and contrary to the facts of the case. 3.In these circumstances, in our opinion, the decision of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal being based on finding of fact, it cannot be said that any substantial question of law arises from the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The appeal is accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs. (A.R. Joshi, J.) (J.P. Devadhar, J.)