The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central-Iii, Mumbai v. Mr. Gulu Mirchandani

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 472 OF 2006 The Commissioner of Income Tax,Central-III, Mumbai. ..........Appellant. VersusMr. Gulu Mirchandani. ............ Respondent. Mr. Vimal Gupta for the Appellant. Mr. Atul Jasani with Mr. T. C. Tripathi for the Respondent. P.C.: CORAM :BILAL NAZKIandA. A. KUMBHAKONI, JJ.DATED :7TH JULY, 2008. Bare perusal of the questions framed in the memo of appeal wouldshow that the questions tried to be raised as the questions of law are in factquestions of facts. An addition of Rs.9,30,000/- was deleted on the groundthat there was enough evidence to suggest that this money was withdrawnfrom the bank, brought into Mumbai and left by the mother with her son,who is the assessee. A question was put to assessee after the search, “Duringthe course of search a cash of Rs.12,80,000/- has been found and out of thisamount of Rs.8,00,000/- which are kept in hundred rupees bundles do notbear any bank slip or seal, please explain the source of cash found and alsoexplain why the bundles of notes not bearing seal slip should be considered as income from undisclosed sources.” In answer to this question, whileexplaining the income the assessee said that Rs.8,50,000/- were withdrawnby his mother Mrs. Padma Mirchandani for her impending operation in themonth of October, 2000 when she visited Bombay and was admitted inBreach Candy Hospital. But due to technical reasons her operation could nottake place at Mumbai and she had to be operated upon at Apollo Hospital atDelhi. This was not believed by the Income Tax Authority. But thisexplanation was accepted by the Tribunal and it was found on evidence thatan amount of Rs.8,50,000/- was withdrawn from Bank of Tokyo, New Delhion 21[st] October, 2000. But addition was made in his account on the groundthat if she had to be operated in New Delhi, why was the money brought toBombay. This is merely a question of fact. 2.In view of the above, the appeal is dismissed. Sd/- (BILAL NAZKI, J.)Sd/- (A.A.KUMBHAKONI, J.)