The Commissioner of Income-tax, Bhopal v. Ravi Taparia - 2015-LL-0108-51

Citation	2015-LL-0108-51
Appellant Name	The Commissioner of Income-tax, Bhopal
Respondent Name	Ravi Taparia
Court	HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Relevant Act	Income-tax
Date of Order	08/01/2015
Assessment Year	2006-07
Judgment	View Judgment
Keyword Tags	search and seizure operation • material available on record • substantial question of law • unexplained cash credit • fixed deposit
Bot Summary:	Aggrieved by the order dated 5.03.13 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore, this appeal has been filed by the Revenue under 260-A of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2006-07. Based on the search and seizure operation under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act certain proceedings were initiated under Section 153-A. The assessing officer assessed the total income of the assessee at 51,26,687/- by making an addition of certain unexplained cash credit and loan appearing in the bank account of the assessee. On a further appeal being filed to the Tribunal and the Tribunal having allowed the appeal, this application has been filed. The only question warranting consideration is with regard to certain amount received by the assessee through cheque from one Shri Deepak Shrivastava and Padmaja Shrivastava through N. R. I. Ajay Sadana for the years in question. On considering the contentions advanced, we find that the learned Tribunal has gone into the question in detail and after taking note of the entire transaction that took place from para 8 onwards of the impugned order has discussed the transaction in detail and it has been found that Shri Ajay 2 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Bhopal Vs. Shri Ravi Taparia Sadana is an N. R. I. a businessman settled in the United Kingdom and all the transactions have been made by him through cheque and these transactions cannot be treated as money of the assessee. The Tribunal has given a detailed justification for the same. The procedure followed by the Tribunal and the reasons given by the Tribunal are nothing but due appreciation of the factual aspect of the matter and the discretion has been exercised by the Tribunal and the Commissioner after considering the factual aspect of the matter.

The Commissioner of Income Tax, Bhopal Vs. Shri Ravi Taparia I. T. A. No. 38/13 8/01/15 Shri Sanjay Lal, learned counsel for appellant. Aggrieved by order dated 5.03.13 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore, this appeal has been filed by Revenue under 260-A of Income Tax Act for assessment year 2006-07. Based on search and seizure operation under Section 132 of Income Tax Act certain proceedings were initiated under Section 153-A. assessing officer assessed total income of assessee at ` 51,26,687/- by making addition of certain unexplained cash credit and loan appearing in bank account of assessee. On appeal being filed, initially Commissioner (Appeals) partly allowed appeal and confirmed addition to tune of only ` 47,53,000/-. However, on further appeal being filed to Tribunal and Tribunal having allowed appeal, this application has been filed. only question warranting consideration is with regard to certain amount received by assessee through cheque from one Shri Deepak Shrivastava and Padmaja Shrivastava through N. R. I. Ajay Sadana for years in question. On considering contentions advanced, we find that learned Tribunal has gone into question in detail and after taking note of entire transaction that took place from para 8 onwards of impugned order has discussed transaction in detail and it has been found that Shri Ajay 2 Commissioner of Income Tax, Bhopal Vs. Shri Ravi Taparia Sadana is N. R. I. businessman settled in United Kingdom and all transactions have been made by him through cheque and these transactions cannot be treated as money of assessee. It is found that Shri Deepak Shrivastava and Smt. Padmaja Shrivastava had given loan to three persons namely Shri Ravi Taparia and, thereafter to Shri Rafique Khan, Ishaq Khan and Shashi Bhan Singh. finding of fact is recorded to say that loan was given to these three persons against fixed deposit and by referring to material available on record, it is found that there is no need for addition of this amount as entire transaction is done properly has been explained and is in accordance to law. Tribunal has given detailed justification for same. procedure followed by Tribunal and reasons given by Tribunal are nothing but due appreciation of factual aspect of matter and discretion has been exercised by Tribunal and Commissioner after considering factual aspect of matter. That being so, we find that no substantial question of law arises warranting reconsideration in matter. appeal is therefore dismissed. (RAJENDRA MENON) (S. K. GANGELE) JUDGE JUDGE Vy Commissioner of Income-tax, Bhopal v. Ravi Taparia

Metadata

Judgment