2005 (5) TMI 47

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... in this appeal under section 260A of the Income-tax Act. The facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the assessee had filed his return for the assessment year 1996-97. The Assessing Officer by a detailed order dated February 17, 1999, assessed the total income at Rs. 1,37,89,107. This order of the Assessing Officer was challenged in appeal by the assessee before the Commissioner of Income-tax, New Delhi. Vide his order dated January 14, 2000, he dealt with various grounds raised by the assessee and the claim raised under ground No. 3 relating to interest of Rs. 2,61,193 charged from M/s. Toolman Engineers, wherein the assessee had advanced an amount of Rs. 34,42,850 as interest free loan to the said concern. The order of the Co....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rned Departmental Representative contended that there was no element of commercial expediency and, therefore, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) fell in error in deleting the additions made by the Assessing Officer to the extent of proportionate interest. To the arguments raised by the learned Departmental Representative, the learned Authorised Representative contended that there was an element of commercial expediency, which led the assessee to divert its funds. According to the assessee the funds were diverted as space in the building was required on rent for establishing business. We have heard the parties and taken ourselves through the record and find that the plea of commercial expediency is out of place for the reason tha....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....essee to transfer the said amount to one of its sister concern or not, is primarily a question of fact. The contention that the funds were advanced from self-generated funds of the assessee and that there was a need for that purpose, is again a question of fact. It is a settled principle of law that the Tribunal is the final fact-finding authority and the courts while exercising the appellate jurisdiction under section 260A of the Act would not normally interfere with such findings. The assessee had framed as many as five questions of law, which according to the assessee fall for consideration of the court in the present appeal. The bare reading of all these questions itself shows, that they are purely questions of fact, much less pure ques....