IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.P.RAY MONDAY, THE 23RD MAY 2011 / 2ND JYAISHTA 1933 ITA.No. 197 of 2001() --------------------- AGAINST ORDER IN ITA.959/1991 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH .................... APPELLANT / RESPONDENT -------------------- M/S.VANAJA TEXTILES LTD., KURICHIKARA POST, TRICHUR - 680 028. BY ADV. . SMT.PREETHA S. NAIR RESPONDENT(S) / APPELLANT & RESPONDENT --------------- 1. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (ASSMT.) SPECIAL RANGE, TRICHUR. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COCHIN. ADV. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES) SRI.GEORGE K. GEORGE, SC FOR IT THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/05/2011, ALONG WITH ITA NOS. 201 & 202 OF 2001 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & BHABANI PRASAD RAY, JJ. ---------------------------------- I.T.A. Nos.197, 201 & 202 of 2001 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 23rd day of May, 2011 J U D G M E N T Ramachandran Nair, J. These are appeals filed by the assessee against the common order issued by the Tribunal in three appeals. 2. When the matter was taken up, we are told that learned counsel who filed these appeals died, and even though his son requested the appellant assessee to engage another counsel, they have not chosen to do so. Junior to the then counsel for the appellant shifted office and does not want to appear for the appellant. 3. After hearing the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent and after going through the orders impugned, we do not think there is any need to issue fresh notice to the appellant to engage a counsel and argue the matter, because in our view, no substantial question of law arises from the orders of the Tribunal. The only addition involved is Rs.2 ITA Nos.197, 201 & 202/2001 -2- lakhs and interest thereon, which represented unexplained credits in the name of 9 persons. The Department on enquiry found that all the creditors are bogus and hence addition was made. The Tribunal also sustained the addition made. 4. However, these appeals are filed claiming that the amount belongs to the Managing Director of the Company and his relatives. However, this claim is against the records in as much as credit entries are in the name of bogus persons. Therefore, we do not find any substantial question of law arising from the orders of the Tribunal or any merit in the claim of the appellant assessee. Consequently, these I.T.Appeals are dismissed. Registry will forward a copy of this judgment to the appellant for records. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) (BHABANI PRASAD RAY, JUDGE) jg