2019 (11) TMI 277 - SCH - Income Tax

Unexplained investment u/s 69 - High Court which has reversed the said conclusion recorded by the Tribunal and restored the opinion of the Assessing Officer whilst holding that the explanation offered by the assessee was not satisfactory - whether the High Court should have interfered with the finding of fact recorded by the Appellate Tribunal? - HELD THAT - From the analysis made by the High Court, discerned from the impugned judgment, we find that the High Court has considered all relevant aspects of the matter and concluded that the Appellate Tribunal misdirected itself in assuming certain facts which were not relevant and unsubstantiated. In our opinion, the approach of the High Court is in accord with the material on record and the legal position. That being a possible view, no interference is warranted. In view of the above, the appeal is dismissed.

Summary

Issues involved:
Addition of investment under Section 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961; Interference by High Court with findings of the Appellate Tribunal.

Analysis:

1. Addition of investment under Section 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961:
The appeal in question raised the issue of the addition of a specific amount as investment by the Assessing Officer under Section 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer was dissatisfied with the explanation provided by the assessee, leading to the matter being referred to the Commissioner. Subsequently, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal reversed the Assessing Officer's finding, citing reasons in an order dated 20.02.2004. The High Court, however, disagreed with the Tribunal's conclusion, reinstating the opinion of the Assessing Officer while deeming the explanation by the assessee as unsatisfactory. The pivotal question revolved around whether the High Court was justified in intervening with the factual findings of the Appellate Tribunal.

2. Interference by High Court with findings of the Appellate Tribunal:
Upon scrutinizing the High Court's analysis as reflected in the impugned judgment, it was observed that the High Court meticulously considered all pertinent aspects of the case. The High Court determined that the Appellate Tribunal had erred by basing its decision on irrelevant and unproven facts. The Supreme Court opined that the High Court's approach was aligned with the evidence on record and the prevailing legal principles. Consequently, the Supreme Court concluded that since the High Court's stance was a plausible one, there was no justification for interference. Ultimately, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, thereby upholding the decision of the High Court and disposing of any pending applications.