The Commissioner Of Income Tax-Iinashik v. M/S Ramdeo Oil Industries,Jalgaon

1 ITA33-12.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,BENCH AT AURANGABAD INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.33 /2012 The Commissioner of Income Tax-IINashik V/s M/s Ramdeo Oil Industries,Jalgaon .. Appellant .. Respondent .... Shri D.V.Soman,Adv.for appellant. ... CORAM :S.C.DHARMADHIKARI & RAVINDRA V.GHUGE,JJ. DATE : 13TH FEBRUARY, 2014. PER COURT : Heard Mr.Soman, advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant. 2]We have perused with the assistance of Mr.Soman the orders of the Assessment Officer, Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals and the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. 3]The issue pertains to unexplained investments and particularly jewelery. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [for brevity hereinafter referred to as the IAT] has in its detail order found that the explanation given by the assessee was satisfactory. The reasons assigned by the IAT at para no.11 of the order passed, clearly shows that finding of the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals, has been accepted. The Commissioner of Income Tax as also the IAT found that the Assessee Officer accepted that unrecorded income of assessee is utilised for acquisition of jewelery. He has assessed unrecorded turn over at Rs.One Crore Seventy Lac Fifty Three Thousand One Hundred Fifty Three in the hands of the assessee. But said turn over which has been shown with the balance sheet is unexplained investment, expenses and other outgoing found in the course of search. He therefore, assessed sum of Rs.Twenty Seven Lac Ninety Seven Thousand Four Hundred Nineteen as investment in gold ornaments. Being satisfied with the explanation of assessee, Commissioner of Income Tax has deleted the addition and the revenue questioned it. 4]However, Commissioner of Income Tax and the IAT has held that there is a complete explanation given by the assessee. The Commissioner of Income Tax has referred to that explanation and by applying correct legal principles, arrived at a finding that the addition was not justified and requires to be deleted. Such a finding of fact has been affirmed by IAT. 5]We do not find that there any substantial question of law arises for consideration in the present appeal. The appeal is therefore, devoid of any merits and is dismissed. [RAVINDRA V.GHUGE,J.][S.C.DHARMADHIKARI,J.] umg/