TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2000 (5) TMI 171
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....v.) for reasonable exercise of powers under section 132 of the Act. It is also contended that since the search was invalid and illegal consequential assessments under section 158BC were invalid and liable to be cancelled. 3. In the case of Smt. Lavina Bhatia it has been contended that the impugned block assessment order passed under section 158BA was liable to be quashed because the Assessing Officer had failed to record clear finding as to the satisfaction that any undisclosed income belonged to the assessee being the other person as required under section 158BD of the Act. 4. Again in all these four cases, common grounds have been taken against various additions of undisclosed income made on the basis of jottings in the seized diary Annexure A-7 of the Panchnama. 5. We have gone through the materials on the file and heard the Ld. ARs of both the sides. The ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the search and seizure operation under section 132 was improper, invalid and illegal because there was no information against the assessee in possession of the DIT (Inv.) for reasonable exercise of his powers under section 132 of the Act. He added that the information was in respec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....x Inspector in respect of investment in the property without confronting the said report to the assessee. 8. He further submitted that the Assessing Officer was not justified in making arbitrary addition as undisclosed income from garments export business inNepalby treating all Nepali parties to be benami on mere suspicion and surmises. 9. He further submitted that the Assessing Officer had not properly considered all the explanations and evidences furnished in the course of the proceeding before him. He has not even properly examined the jottings in the seized diary. 10. The ld. AR of the assessee also challenged the various other additions as mentioned in the ground of appeals including the addition as undisclosed income on account of investment in jewellery in the case of Smt. Lavina Bhatia. 11. The ld. Sr. counsel for the revenue, on the other hand, submitted that the Tribunal did not have the power to consider the validity of the search. He added that as the Assessing Officer did not have the power to consider the validity of search the Tribunal also did not have same powers because grounds of appeals and the consequent power of the Tribunal to adjudicate the same ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as authorised as per the DIT (Inv.) file. 18. The ld. AR of the assessee also made his submissions on the merits of various additions. He contended that the impugned additions were not borne out by the jottings in the seized diary because the Assessing Officer had made his own interpretation of the figures based on conjecture and surmises without having any relevant to the facts of the case and without there being any corroborative secondary evidence/material in support of the figures and interpretation made by the Assessing Officer. He argued that the additions made by the Assessing Officer could not lawfully be sustained either on facts or in accordance with law". He added that the Assessing Officer had completely ignored the various evidence like agreements/deeds for the purchase of the properties and made uncalled for and unwarranted additions on the basis of his personal presumptions. He further added that jottings in the seized diary did not support the figures adopted by the Assessing Officer to work out un-disclosed investment etc. He further submitted that the Assessing Officer had not formed any material nor the concerned parties had given any statement to support the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....onsider whether the Assessing Officer had validly and legally assumed jurisdiction under section 158BA/158BC. For assuming jurisdiction and issuing notice under section 158BA/158BC, the Assessing Officer is required to see whether search was initiated in the case. He has no power to go into the validity of search. Similarly, in appeal the Tribunal can consider whether the search was initiated in the case and thereby the Assessing Officer had assumed jurisdiction to issue notice under section 158BA/158BC. This power arises because the impugned assessment is based on the assumption of jurisdiction and the issue of notice and the issue of notice is based on the initiation of search in the case. Thus the question of validity of search is beyond the pale of power of the Assessing Officer and the Tribunal so far as the making of assessment and adjudication of appeal thereon are concerned. Every authority must act within his powers and jurisdiction. There is no appeal provided in the Act against the power under section 132. If at all, the validity of search has to be challenged it can be challenged in a writ before the High Court. 24. After seeing the search warrant and the grounds for....