COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. VISHWANT KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) 2002, passed by the Tribunal, Delhi.

(2.) THE bare reading of the above finding clearly shows that they are finding of facts based upon the record produced before the authorities and no question of law much less a substantial question of law arises for consideration in the present appeal. It will not be proper for this Court to interfere in the impugned order merely on the ground that on the facts aforeindicated, it could be possible to take another view. Substantial question of law should arise in the case before the Court can interfere in such matters. Reference can be made to the Division Bench judgments of this Court in the cases of Mahavir Woollen Mills vs. CIT (2000) 162 CTR (Del) 267 : (2000) 245 ITR 297 (Del) and CIT vs. S.R. Fragrances Ltd. (2004) 187 CTR (Del) 4 : (2004) 270 ITR 560 (Del).

(3.) IT is contended by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent that the account books and other records of the have taken any steps in compliance of the statutory provisions prior thereto. This can hardly be disputed and in fact there is nothing on record before us to indicate to the contrary. Once the assessee was not in a position to have access to his records, there was a sufficient cause before the authorities to treat the period of penalty only for two months as indicated concurrently by the appellate authorities. The authorities concerned have exercised their discretion and we see no apparent perversity in the said order. In fact the discretion has been exercised in consonance with the settled principles of law. No merit. Dismissed.