bgp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1498 OF 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant Vs. Mrs.Alka S.Chaturvedi ..Respondent Mr.P.S.Sahadevan for appellant. Mr.Subhash S.Shetty for respondent. CORAM :- V.C.DAGA & J.P.DEVADHAR,JJ. DATE : 8TH SEPTEMBER, 2009 P.C. 1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. 2. Following two questions are sought to be raised in the appeal. a) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal erred in confirming the order of the CIT(A) deleting the addition on account of undisclosed income of Rs.8,01,07,334/- pertaining to transaction of shares ? b) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal erred in confirming the order of the CIT(A) deleting the disallowances of interest of Rs.1,55,25,900/- claimed to be paid on unproved loans ? 3. So far as first question is concerned, the Tribunal, in its order, has recorded a finding that; “Nothing contrary was brought to our knowledge. Since the identical issue is involved in the case of the assessee and there is nothing on record to suggest that any income results for taxation out of these transactions. The order of the Tribunal in the case of SVC Growth Fund Pvt.Ltd. In IT (SS)A.No.490/M/2003 dated 16.04.2007 also supports the case of the assessee wherein on the identical facts addition was deleted for sale of shares against squaring off the loan liability. In the said case also the shares were sold at a price which was higher than the ruling market price and the addition on this account was deleted. Accordingly, in our opinion, the CIT(A) has rightly deleted the addition. We uphold the same. 4. So far as second question is concerned, it revolves around disallowance of a sum of interest of Rs.1,55,25,900/- alleged to have been paid on the unproved loans. This question is considered by the Tribunal in paragraph No.14, which reads as under: 14. The next ground is regarding the deletion of the addition of Rs.1,55,25,900/-. The facts are that the assessee had taken loans from certain parties and paid interest on the same. The Assessing Officer made addition for the interest payment during the assessment years 1994-95, 1995-96 and 1996-97 forming part of the block period. The reason given by the Assessing Officer is that since he has held that the sale of shares was found to be not genuine therefore the claim of interest was wrong. The CIT(A) considering the submissions of the Assessee deleted the addition. 5. Having seen both the paragraphs and the findings recorded in the impugned, it is nothing but a finding of fact recorded by the Tribunal based on appreciation of evidence with which no fault can be found. In this view of the matter, appeal is without any substance. The same stands dismissed with no order as to costs. (J.P.DEVADHAR,J.) (V.C.DAGA,J.)