Kishinchand M. Thakur vs Commissioner of Income Tax

Mrs. Sujata Manohar, J.—This is an application under s. 256(2) of the IT Act, 1961. The applicant has prayed that the Tribunal should be directed to raise the following questions of law and refer them to us for determination :

Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was legally justified in saying that the sum of Rs. 89,082/- represented income from undisclosed sources under s. 69A of the I.T. Act ?

Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was legally justified in holding that the sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- could be considered as unexplained investment of the assessee from undisclosed sources under s. 69B of the IT Act, 1961 ?

Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was legally justified in holding that the sum of Rs. 25,000/- could be considered as unexplained investment of the assessee from undisclosed sources under s. 69B of the IT Act, 1961 ?"

It is submitted on behalf of the applicant that the Tribunal has misdirected itself on facts because it has not taken into consideration the fact that for the earlier year, in the wealth-tax return filed by the assessee, the items in question were in fact disclosed. The submission is thus entirely based on appreciation of facts. The Tribunal has held that the sums represent income from undisclosed sources or unexplained investment of the assessee from undisclosed sources. In the light of the facts placed before the Tribunal and considered by it, the questions do not require us to consider whether the findings given by the Tribunal are perverse or not. Hence the questions will have to be answered in the light of the facts as were found by the Tribunal. The findings being based on facts, no question of law arises which is required to be determined by us.

Rule is discharged with no order as to costs.