Commissioner of Income Tax vs Lachhiram Puranmal Moman

A.M. Sapre, J.

The decision rendered in this case shall also govern disposal of other connected case being M.C.C. No. 231 of 1995, as both these cases were disposed of by the Tribunal (I.T.A.T.) by passing a common impugned order.

This is an application filed by the revenue (Commissioner of Income Tax) u/s 256(2) of Income Tax Act consequent upon the dismissal of application made by revenue u/s 256(1) ibid by the Tribunal by order dated 1.9.1994, passed in three cases being R.A. Nos.299/Ind./93, 300/Ind./93 & 301/Ind./93 which in turn arise out of three appeals being I.T.A. Nos.516/Ind./91,1153/Ind./89 & 517/Ind./91.

In the opinion of Tribunal, no referable question of law arises in the cases and hence, the application for making the reference to this court for ''answer on merits u/s 256(1) came to be dismissed. So the short question that arises for consideration in this case is whether any referable question of law arises in this case out of the order passed by Tribunal while deciding the appeal and/or whether question proposed by the revenue can be said to be the question of law so as to call upon the Tribunal to refer to this court for answer on merits?

Heard Shri R.L. Jain, learned counsel for the applicant.

Having heard learned counsel for the applicant and having perused record of the case, we are of the view that application does not involve any referable question of law and what is proposed do not satisfy the test laid down for calling the said question. It is in other words, a question of fact and hence, the application must be dismissed.

The dispute in substance relates to certain addition made by assessing officer in the gross total income of an assessee. However on being asked, the assessee furnished an explanation and filed confirmatory statements/ letters from the creditors justifying the bona fide of the transaction in relation to the entry which was being made basis for addition in the total income of the assessee. The Tribunal in an appeal filed by assessee went into the explanation offered by assessee and the documents filed. It was held that explanation offered coupled with the documents filed clearly demonstrate that the entry in the books of account is genuine and represent the correct transaction inter se assessee and the creditor. In other words, the factual finding was categorically recorded by the Tribunal in favour of assessee holding the transaction to be the genuine one. Accordingly, the addition made by assessing officer in the gross total income treating the entry to be the bogus, was set aside and the addition was deleted.

In our opinion, this cannot be said to be question involving any legal issue. It does not involve any referable question which this court may decide in exercise of powers u/s 256(1) of the Act. It is a pure question of fact requiring no interference by this Court. It was thus rightly declined by the Tribunal when the Tribunal rejected application u/s 256(1) ibid. We find no reason to differ with the view taken by the Tribunal on this question and while thus concurring with the said view, uphold the same. As a result, the application is held to be devoid of any merit. It is dismissed.