JUDGMENT
N.K. Sodhi J.
1. This appeal under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is directed against the order dated October 25, 2001, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal dismissing the Department’s appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) deleting the addition of Rs. 4,08,768 for the assessment year 1990-91. The assessee entered into an agreement to lease its machinery to Vira Properties Pvt. Ltd., Madras, on the terms and conditions stated therein. The lessee was to pay a monthly rent of Rs. 51,096 as primary rent and another sum of Rs. 1,000 as secondary rent. In the return filed in the relevant assessment year, the assessee included rental income only for four months of the year and did not include the same for the remaining eight months. The explanation furnished by the assessee was that the lessee was in financial difficulty as a result of which the two parties further agreed in July, 1989, that no rent would accrue to the assessee for the period from August 1, 1989, to March 31, 1990. The Assessing Officer did not accept this explanation and added the aforesaid amount towards the income for the relevant assessment year. Feeling aggrieved by this order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner who by his order dated September 30, 1992, deleted the addition. The Revenue went in appeal before the Tribunal which has been dismissed by order dated October 25, 2001. Hence, this appeal by the Revenue,
We have heard counsel for the appellant and perused the impugned orders passed by the Commissioner and the Tribunal. The question that arises in this case is whether the arrangement arrived at between the parties was not genuine and whether it had been adopted only with a view to deprive the Revenue of the tax due or was it a genuine arrangement. The Tribunal as also the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) accepted the explanation and found as a fact that the arrangement was genuine and there was no intention to hoodwink the Revenue. This is a pure finding of fact arrived at by the income-tax authorities and no question of law much less a substantial question of law arises from the impugned orders.
In the result, there is no merit in the appeal and the same stands dismissed.