IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 432 OF 2006 The Commissioner of Income Tax 20 ...Appellant Versus Rita Sanu Bhattacharjee ...Respondent. Mr. Vimal Gupta for the Appellant Ms. Aasifa Khan for the Respondent. CORAM: B ILAL NAZKI and SS. SHIDNE, JJ. DATE: JULY 2, 2008 P.C.:- The following questions have been framed:- “(i) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Hon'ble ITAT was justified in holding that the impugned amount of Rs.22,500/- constitute income of the severed husband of the assessee or diversion of husband' s income by operation of law? (ii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Hon'ble ITAT has erred in law by not appreciating the judgment of Hon' ble Bombay High Court in the case of Princess Maheshwari Devi of Pratab Garh Poona v/s CIT (1982) 147 ITR 258 wherein it is held that monthly alimony being regular periodic return from a definite source was income within the meaning of section 2(24) of Income Tax Act, 1961 and was liable to tax?” 2. Since the amounts are too meagre, and there has been a finding of the authorities below that the income, which was sought to be computed as income of the respondent, was, in fact, the income of her husband, therefore, we do not find this an appropriate case for admission. Appeal is dismissed. BILAL NAZKI, J. S.S. SHINDE, J.