1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Civil Application No. 9045 of 2007 in Misc. Civil Application (Review) St. No.17952 of 2007 in W.P. No. 5687 of 2004 (D) (Bhimrao s/o. Vitthalrao Kapse .vs. The Commr. of Income Tax-I, Nagpur and Ors.) =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Office Notes, Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions : Court's or Judge's orders and Registrar's orders. - =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- CORAM : D.D.Sinha and A.B.Chaudhari, JJ. DATE : 04.04.2008. Heard Mr. S.N.Bhattad, Adv. for the Applicant and Mr.Anand Parchure, Adv. for the Respondent No.1. Civil Application No. 9045 of 2007 is moved by the applicant for condonation of delay in filing the review petition. Considered the contentions. Perused the Civil Application. For the reasons stated in the Civil Application, delay is condoned. The application is accordingly allowed. Misc. Civil Application (Review) St. No.17952/2007 Heard Mr. S.N.Bhattad, Adv. for the Applicant and Mr.Anand Parchure, Adv. for the Respondent No.1. Considered the rival contentions canvassed by the respective counsel. Perused the impugned order. Perusal of the impugned order 2 shows that this Court after taking into consideration the contentions canvassed by the respective parties as well as considering the order passed by the Revisional Authority which was impugned in the Writ Petition concluded that the Commissioner of Income Tax has taken into consideration the evidence, which was available on record and found that the amount reflected in the Bank Account No.2114 has nothing to do with the Bank Account of the Society which is separate. Similarly, Mr.Sontakke as well as Mrs. Kusum Kapse did not have ostensible income source and in absence therefore, it was concluded by us that the findings recorded by the Commissioner of Income Tax were just and proper. So far as question of double taxation is concerned, we have also mentioned in the order sthat the same was not specifically raised by the review petitioner before the Revisional Authority. In the circumstances, no case is made out for showing indulgence. Hence, the review petition is dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE ssj