1 rpa IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 383 OF 2006 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 383 OF 2006 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 383 OF 2006 IN IN IN INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 384 OF 2006 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 384 OF 2006 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 384 OF 2006 IN IN IN INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 385 OF 2006 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 385 OF 2006 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 385 OF 2006 Kamal R.Sanghavi .. Appellant V/s. The Commissioner of Income-Tax, City-XIV. .. Respondent Mr.B.V.Jhaveri for the Appellant. Mr.Vinod Gupta for the Respondent. CORAM : BILAL NAZKI AND CORAM : BILAL NAZKI AND CORAM : BILAL NAZKI AND S.S.SHINDE, JJ. S.S.SHINDE, JJ. S.S.SHINDE, JJ. DATE : 20TH JUNE, 2008. DATE : 20TH JUNE, 2008. DATE : 20TH JUNE, 2008. P.C.:- P.C.:- P.C.:- . The facts as narrated in the order of the Tribunal give rise to the present Appeal are as follows : 2. In terms of section 132 a search was carried out on 20th April, 1999 in the premises of the assessee, his family members and group of concerns. 2 During the course of search, at the residential premises of the assessee, several cheque books and pay-in-slips in respect of various false bank accounts in the name of the employees of the group of concerns and assessess’s relatives and friends were found and seized. It was also found that some of the cheques, which were blank, were also signed by the account holders. In all the documents found were in respect of 16 bank accounts. As per Assessing Officer’s order the Assessing Officer made elaborate inquiries regarding the genuineness of the bank accounts, and it was found that the cheques and cash, in these bank accounts, were being deposited by the assessee or his daughter. The daughters statement was also recorded on 20th April, 1999. At the time of search, she accepted that she was herself filling the pay-in-slip and was depositing cheques or cash. The Assessing Officer also summoned the account holders and examined them. One of the account holder was Shri. Mahendra P.Joshi and statement has been used by the Tribunal. 3. On these facts, the Authority as well as the Tribunal came to the conclusion that all these transactions were benami transactions and the money was being deposited and the accounts were operated upon by the assessee. Therefore, the questions framed do not arise at all. The questions framed in 3 paragraph 18 are as under : (i) Whether all receipts, which were reflected as credits in bank accounts, partake of the characteristic of the income where there is no evidence on record to prove that the receipts are the fruits of income earning efforts put in by the appellant more particularly if the following aspects of the matter are considered : a. The payments were made by the different firms to twelve persons in whose bank accounts the same were credited. b. Such payments were allowed as expenditure incurred by the paying firms by the A.O. assessing such firms. c. Such payments, when originally received, could not partake the character of income in the hands of the appellant merely because the Appellant monitored the funds. d. There were not an iota of evidence on record to show that the appellant had rendered any services at all to those firms paying the 4 amounts to twelve different parties. (ii) Whether the Tribunal was right in taxing the payment of salary or remuneration to the said twelve parties as income of the appellant in the absence of any evidence on record to prove that any services have been rendered by the appellant to various concerns who have paid various sums to twelve different parties ? 4. The contention of the learned counsel for the Appellant is that it was a fact that the bank accounts were in the name of 12 persons and the amounts lying in these accounts could not be taken as the assessess’s income. In fact, the Tribunal as well as other authority came to the conclusion that the bank accounts were only benami accounts and actually the amounts were deposited and the accounts were operated upon by the assessee. No question of law falls for consideration. 5. The Appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. (BILAL NAZKI, J.) (BILAL NAZKI, J.) (BILAL NAZKI, J.) (S.S.SHINDE, J.) (S.S.SHINDE, J.) (S.S.SHINDE, J.)