PCIT Vs Mukul Kakar (Madhya Pradesh High Court)
Madhya Pradesh High Court held that an appeal to the High Court from a decision of the Tribunal lies only when a substantial question of law is involved. Appeal dismissed in absence of substantial question of law.
Facts- During the course of proceedings the Assessing Officer (AO) noticed that the assessee is rising loans from several parties. In order to examine those loans, the AO issued notices under Section 133(6) of the Act to the creditors, but did not get reply from 15 creditors. Before the AO, the assessee submitted that the creditors are not cooperating and accordingly, furnished available details as the assessee had repaid the loans to almost all the creditors prior to the commencement of present assessment proceedings.
CIT(A) confirmed the addition of Rs. 373 lakhs as unexplained cash credits u/s. 68 of the Income Tax Act. ITAT deleted the addition. Being aggrieved, revenue has preferred the present appeal.
Conclusion- Held that in the instant case no substantial question of law arises from the order of the Tribunal as the appellant has raised all the questions of facts and have disputed the fact findings of the ITAT in the garb of substantial questions of law which is not permitted by the statute itself.
