JUDGMENT : Deepak Maheshwari, J. Heard learned counsel for the wife-petitioner. 2. Learned trial Court has granted interim maintenance allowance @ Rs. 5000/- per month in favour of the wife-petitioner under Section 23 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 vide order dated 17.12.2016. Petitioner preferred an appeal being aggrieved by this order. Learned appellate Court after hearing both the parties, enhanced the amount to the tune of Rs. 9000/- per month vide order dated 15.1.2018, Rs. 6500/- per month for petitioner and Rs. 2500/- per month for her minor daughter namely Varenya. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the income tax returns of the non-petitioner-husband for the assessment year 2015-16 and 2016-2017 have not been taken into consideration by the courts below. 4. On perusal of the order dated 15.1.2018 it has found that the income tax returns have been taken into consideration by lower appellate Court. After taking this fact into consideration that the wife-petitioner is also well educated and is having the degree of MSC (biotechnology) and preparing for PHED, the appeal has been decided in the manner aforesaid. Both the courts below have observed that without the evidence having being recorded by the parties, the conclusion about their income cannot be drawn. But looking to the necessity to meet out the day to day expenses by the wife-petitioner, the interim maintenance allowance has been granted. 5. I do not find any impropriety or illegality in the order impugned passed by the lower appellate court. There is no reason to interfere in the order passed by it, whereby the interim maintenance of Rs. 9000/- per month allowance has been granted. 6. In the result, there is no substance in the revision petition preferred by the wife-petitioner. Hence, the same is dismissed.