IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 
 . 
  01.11.2010 
.
.
.
 Present:       Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal and Mr. Utpal Saha, Advocates for the 
 Appellant. 
.
.
 + ITA No.1662/2010 
.
 Two questions raised before in the ITAT were answered in the following 
 manner:- 
 (1)       ?In a nutshell, his findings were that investment in land at Village 
 Pargana was made by late Shri Suresh Chand Goyal on or about 5.10.1996. On his 
 death, the land was mutated by Tehsildar, Ghaziabad in the names of the assessee 
 and his brother on 13.10.1997. The land at Village Parla was also purchased by 
 late Shri Suresh Chand Goyal on 22.07.1996. This land was transferred in the 
 names of the legal heirs of the deceased on 30.11.1997. The purchase of land by 
 Shri Goyal in financial year 1996-97 and mutations thereof were accepted by the 
 AO in the remand report. This was also evidenced by the balance-sheet of late 
 Shri Suresh Chand Goyal drawn as on 31.03.1997 and filed with the return of 
 income for assessment year 1997-98 on 21.10.1997, much before search and seizure 
 operations conducted in the case of the assessee on 22.09.2005. Therefore, it 
 was concluded that additions of ` 4.11 lakh and ` 7.05 lakh in respect of these 
 lands in the hands of the assessee in assessment year 2001-01 could not be 
 upheld. 
 (2)       In a nutshell, his finding was that the late Shri. Suresh Chand Goyal 
 had made a disclosure under VDIS 1997. This disclosure was accompanied by 
 balance-sheet as on 31.3.1995 showed cash-in-hand at ` 4,98,134/-, His balance 
 sheet as on 31.3.1996, filed with the return of income for assessment year 1996- 
 97 showed cash in hand at ` 6,38,147/-. All these returns were filed much before 
 the search and seizure operations were carried out in the case of the assessee. 
 The assessee also filed cash flow statement  from 31.3.1997 to 31.3.2000/ No 
 adverse comment was made by the AO in respect of this statement. The cash 
 available as per this statement was divided between the legal heirs and an 
 amount of ` 9,89,134/- came to the share of the assessee. In these 
 circumstances, he did not approve the finding of the AO that the declaration 
 amongst the legal heirs   regarding  division  of  the  estate  of  late  Shri 
 Suresh 
.
 ITA No.1662/2010                                                        Page 1 
 of 2 
.
 Chand Goyal was wrong. Therefore, he accepted the availability of cash to the 
 extent of `9,89,134/-. Cash found amount to ` 10,41,470/-. There, he upheld the 
 addition of Rs. 52,336/- only. No defect could be pointed  out by the ld. Dr in 
 this matter also. The ld. CIT(Appeals) has examined the position of cash from 
 the balance-sheets of Shri Suresh Chand Goyal and cash flow statement from 
 31.3.1997 to 31.3.2000, which were not disputed by the aO. In these 
 circumstances, we do not find any error in the order of the ld. CIT(Appeals)m 
 which requires correction from us. Thus, this ground is also dismissed. 
.
 The discussion clearly reveals that entire matter is factual and we are of 
 the opinion that facts are correctly appreciated by the Tribunal.  No question 
 of law arises, hence appeal is dismissed. 
.
.
 A.K. SIKRI, J. 
.
 SURESH KAIT, J. 
 NOVEMBER 01, 2010 
.
.
 mr 
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
 ITA No.1662/2010                                                        Page 2 
 of 2 
.
.