2013 (7) TMI 325

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... wasthi, learned counsel appearing for the Income Tax department. No one appears for the respondent. 2. The connected Income Tax Appeal No.113 of 2000 (Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Tilak Ram) was dismissed on 10.9.2009 on the ground that quantum of the amount involved is Rs.25,365/- and the tax component is less than Rs.5000/-. 3. This appeal was admitted on all the five substantial questions o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... kash Arora. We further confirm his finding that Rs.65,000/- in respect of deposits of Risal Singh and Riaz Ahmad were rightly treated as unexplained and are restoring the deposit of Rs.10,000/- by Murari Lal to the file of CIT (A) for fresh adjudication. Grounds stand decided accordingly. 5.7 We have considered the rival submission and perused the record carefully. It will be seen that facts, whi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e view was taken by him in respect of Central Coal Traders, a proprietary concern owned by Ramesh Kumar. These findings of the CIT (A) stand confirmed by the ITAT Delhi Bench "D" in ITA Nos. 2737 and 4024/Del/91, cross appeals of the assessee and Revenue vide order dated 6.5.1997 copy of which is appearing at pages 118 to 142 of the paper book for A.Y. 1986-87 and relying upon those facts it is to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ioned in the ground of appeal that income of M/s United Coal Traders belonged to the assessee and CIT (A) wrongly concluded that it did not belong to assessee. A perusal of para 19 of CIT (A)'s order shall show that there was addition of Rs.20,000/- in the hands of assessee made by the AO on the ground that income of United Transport Co. belonged to assessee and not to Ramesh Kumar and Ashwani Kum .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nch D in the case of assessee himself for A.Y. 1986-87 had already concluded that income of United Transport Co. belonged to Ashwani Kumar and not to the assessee. Accordingly there is no justification to interfere in the order of the CIT (A) which stands upheld. Ground fails." 6. In our view the findings quoted as above are pure findings of facts on which no substantial questions of law as frame .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X