TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1993 (11) TMI 40
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... has been proposed : "Whether, on the basis of the material on record, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that there was no evidence to support the cost of construction taken at Rs. 3,80,000 in the assessment year 1977-78 and Rs. 5,70,000 in the assessment year 1978-79 by the Assessing Officer and thereby deleting the addition made in the assessment year 1977-78 ?" In the other Application No. 270 of 1991, which is in respect of the assessment year 1978-79, the question proposed is : "Whether on the basis of the material on the record, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that there was change in the opinion in initiating proceedings under section 147 for the assessment year 1978-79, when on the b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tly, the Income-tax Officer took proceedings under section 148 of the Income-tax Act for the immediately preceding two assessment years, namely, 1977-78 and 1978-79. The assessments for these two years were reopened on the consideration that taking the calendar year as the previous year, a part of the cost of construction of the cinema hall was liable to be considered in the assessment year 1977-78 and the other part in the assessment year 1978-79. In the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment for the assessment year 1977-78, the Income-tax Officer set out two more reasons, namely, that one of the partners of the assessee-firm had filed a statement sworn on affidavit in a civil suit in which it was stated that the probable cost of co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... applications filed by the Revenue for making a reference to this court under section 256(1) of the Act were also dismissed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. It is in this background that these two applications have been made with a prayer that the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal may be directed to draw up a statement of the case and refer the questions of law set out therein for the opinion of this court. We have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and, in our opinion, the applications made by the Revenue are liable to be dismissed, inasmuch as the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal does not give rise to any question of law. The basic questions that came up for consideration before the appellate authorities were to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....was noticed. The matter had also been examined in detail by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax in the assessment year 1978-79 whose decision has been accepted by the Revenue. For all these reasons, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) held that there was no basis for sustaining any part of the impugned addition made by the Income-tax Officer. The entire addition was, accordingly, deleted. The order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), as observed earlier, has been upheld by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. On going through the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, there is no doubt left in our mind that the Appellate Tribunal has considered all the material aspects fairly and with due care in reaching ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....could be sustained. The question posed in Income-tax Appeal No. 269 of 1991, in our opinion, is purely a question of fact. In this connection, we may refer to a Division Bench decision of this court in CIT v. Sheikhar Chand and Sons [1990] 186 ITR 269 in which one of us (R. K. Gulati J.) was a party, where this court held that the finding of the Tribunal that there was no unexplained investment in the construction of the building complex was a finding of fact and did not give rise to any question of law. Now, coming to the question posed in Income-tax Appeal No. 270 of 1991 in respect of the assessment year 1978-79, plainly speaking, this question has become academic, for, the entire addition made on account of unexplained investment concer....