2014 (4) TMI 1157

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....filed e-return of income on 17.9.20008 declaring a total income of Rs. 4,67,13,200/-. The return of income was processed and was completed by the Assessing Officer by order dated 21.12.2010. The issues raised by the Assessing Authority were that an expenditure of Rs. 1,20,77,000/- claimed to have been incurrred towards payment of commission was disallowed and added to the income of the respondent. The Cash deposits of Rs. 9,00,000/- and Rs. 6,00,000/- were being taxed as undisclosed investment. Besides an expenditure of Rs. 1,25,000/- was disallowed being expenditure on foreign travel. 4. Being aggrieved by the said order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee - respondent preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal whilst re assessing the findings of the Commissioner, has also confirmed the said findings and has also taken note of the fact that said Pradeep Shirodkar had also given a statement admitting the receipt of commission to the extent of Rs. 8,00,000/- from the assessee. This statement corroborated the returns filed by said Pradeep Shirodkar which also, inter alia, disclose the receipt of the commission from different persons. Considering that the facts finding authorities have concurrently come to the conclusion based on material on record that the amount of commission was paid to Pradeep Shirodkar and as such the respondent is entitled to deductions under Section 37 of the Income Tax Act, we find no pervers....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... not settled by pronouncement of this Court or Privy Council or by the Federal Court, or (4) the issue is not free from difficulty, and (5) it calls for a discussion for alternative view.  There is no scope for interference by the High Court with a finding recorded when such finding could be treated to be a finding of fact." Similar view has been taken by the Apex Court in the judgment reported in (2011) 1 S.C.C. 673 in the case of Vijay Kumar Talwar Vs Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi by observing at para 23 thus : "23. A finding of fact may give rise to a substantial question of law, inter alia, in the event the findings are based on no evidence and/or while arriving at the said finding, relevant admissibl....