2022 (11) TMI 781 - HC - Income Tax
Addition on account of difference in receipts as per the Assessee’s bank account when compared with the books of accounts maintained by the Assessee - ITAT concurring with the CIT(A) that the AO had failed to verify the evidence produced before him and for not providing adequate opportunity for hearing to the Assessee - As per CIT AO failed to make any sincere effort regarding the aforesaid addition and the same was made only on the basis of doubt, suspicion, conjecture or surmises without affording proper opportunity of being heard to the Assessee - Substantial question of law - HELD THAT:- ITAT and CIT (A), both fact finding authorities have concurrently held that there is no merit in the ground raised with respect to the addition on account of the income declared by the Assessee and the receipts as per the books of account of the Assessee. CIT(A) in its order has set out the information and explanation furnished by the Assessee explaining each of the entries to substantiate its contention that the said amount is not exigible to tax. The CIT(A) has noted that the documentary evidence in support of the said explanation furnished by the Assessee was available on record. ITAT while concurring with the aforesaid finding has held that the Revenue has failed to controvert the said finding of the CIT(A).
There is no substantial question of law raised in the present appeal. The Supreme Court in the case of Ram Kumar Aggarwal & Anr. vs. Thawar Das (through LRs), [1999 (8) TMI 1008 - SUPREME COURT] has reiterated that under Section 100 of CPC, the jurisdiction of the High Court to interfere with the orders passed by the Courts below is confined to hearing on substantial question of law and interference with finding of the fact is not warranted if it involves re-appreciation of evidence.Appellant has not placed any material on record to contradict the aforesaid concurrent finding of facts returned by the ITAT and CIT(A). - Decided against revenue.