Commissioner of Income Tax vs Kantilal Prabhudas Patel

Shri R.L. Jain, senior advocate with Ms. Veena Mandlik, advocate, for the appellant.

Heard on admission.

The Revenue has preferred this appeal u/s 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, ag fainst the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in I.T. (SS) A. Nos. 79 and 80/IND/2002 by which the Tribunal has deleted the addition made by the Assessing Officer and affirmed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals).

Learned senior Counsel submits that in the search made in the premises of the assessee a number of documents were found which disclosed certain hawala transactions in which the assessee has made income which he had not disclosed in his return for the block period April 1, 1989, to August 18, 1999. Accordingly, on the basis of the said entries, the Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 55 lakhs which was affirmed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), but, the Tribunal on further appeal deleted the said addition. Learned Counsel has pointed out that the Assessing Officer had even given reasons for making the addition of Rs. 55 lakhs, but, the Tribunal capriciously deleted the same. In this context the following question of law has been formulated by the Department:

Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that no estimation of hawala business income can be made for the whole period or 18 months or 450 days on the basis of documents seized during the course of search?

We have heard learned senior Counsel and perused the record placed before us. The inference has been drawn by the Assessing Officer, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal on the basis of the factual data furnished by the documents seized from the possession of the assessee. Though the learned senior Counsel has pressed that on the basis of the transactions for two days in which there was transaction in the sum, of Rs. 12 lakhs, the conclusions drawn by the Assessing Officer and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) were justified, we find that the matter lies strictly in the realm of facts and does not give rise to any question of law within the scope of Section 260A of the Income Tax Act.

In this view of the matter we do not find any substance in this appeal. The appeal is summarily dismissed.