IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH MARCH 2010 / 19TH PHALGUNA 1931 ITA.No. 61 of 2010() -------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 12/08/2009 IN ITA.592/COCH/2008 OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH APPELLANT/APPELLANT: ---------------------------- THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT: ------------------------------- P.K.SULFI, KUNDACHALIL HOUSE, KODUVALLY, KOZHIKODE. THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMAN Ag. CJ & C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = I.T.A. 61 OF 2010 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = DATED THIS, THE 10TH DAY OF MARCH, 2010. J U D G M E N T Raman, Ag. CJ. This appeal is directed against the order of the Tribunal confirming the order of the first appellate authority who cancelled the imposition of punishment. The Tribunal found, based on facts, as narrated by the assessing authority and also the first appellate authority, that when the amount was seized by the Customs authorities and took over possession by the Income-tax authorities, either time limit for filing the regular return or for filing revised return for the assessment year 2005-06 was not over. Seizure of the amount was on 24.11.2004. The assessee was bound to file the return of income for assessment year 2005-06 on 31.7.2005 and declare his income. Return was filed on 1.8.2005 declaring the seized amount and the assessee has explained the source of income. In such circumstances, the Tribunal agreed with the finding of the first appellate authority. Thus this is a pure question of fact. Even though it is contended by the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the Revenue that by fiction of law, the seized amount should be deemed as concealed income, this is not a ITA 61/2010 2 contention raised either before the first appellate authority or before the Tribunal as borne out from the records. As such it is not an issue arising from the order and further no question of law as such is framed on the above issue. For these reasons, the appeal fails. Dismissed. P.R. RAMAN, (Ag. CHIEF JUSTICE) C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, (JUDGE). knc/-