TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (10) TMI 373
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....5.07.2004 passed in ITA No. 734/Luc/2004. The brief facts of the cases are that on 29.09.1987, a survey was conducted under Section 133A of the Income Tax Act (for short, "the Act") in various Banks pertaining to the Accounts and Lockers of the couple. The assessee Dr. Lalit Verma is an I.A.S. Officer. Later, on 26.03.1998, a search and seizure operation was conducted under Section 132 of the Act, at the official residence of the assessee at Butler Palace, Lucknow. The Bank Accounts/Lockers of the couple were also searched. On 31.03.2000, block assessment orders were passed under Section 158BC, against the couple for the block period mentioned above. Dr. Lalit Verma Being aggrieved, the assessee has filed appeals before the CIT(A), who vide its order dated 08.08.2000 observed that "... most of the additions in the block assessment year dated 31.08.2000 had been made without giving the assessee an adequate opportunity of being heard". With these observations, the CIT(A) has set aside the block assessment orders and restored the matter back to the Assessing Officer to pass the fresh assessment orders. Against this order, second appeal bearing No. 264/Luc/2000, was filed by the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al of the Department was dismissed. Still not being satisfied, on 19.08.2008, the Department has filed an appeal bearing ITA No. 80/2008 before this Hon'ble Court under Section 260A of the Act. With this background, we heard Sri D.D. Chopra, learned counsel for the Department and learned counsel for the assessee at length and gone through the written submissions. In view of above, the ITA No. 48/2004 and 32/2005 against the Tribunal's orders dated 31.12.2003 & 17.11.2004 have become infructuous when the third time fresh assessment order has already been passed by the authorities below. Both the appeals have merely an academic value. Hence, both the appeals are hereby dismissed being infructuous. Appeal No. 80 of 2008 This is only effective appeal. The appeal is filed against the Tribunal's order (third time) dated 12.10.2007, arising out of ITA No. 3/Luc/2007. On 15.03.2010, a Coordinate Bench of this Court has admitted the appeal on the following substantial question of law:- "Whether the Tribunal has erred in law in failing to appreciate that the Finance Act, 2002 has amended Section 158 BB F(1) with retrospective effect from 01.07.1995 to secure that assessment of undisclo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n of TDS. In the above scenario, as per the admitted substantial question of law, the principal issue involved in the present case is that upto what extent, the information could be utilized for completing the block assessment proceedings. In the instant case, it is evident that the information came to the Department as a result of the surveys and inquiries conducted prior to the search and the same have been utilized. The Department in the instant case, is of the view that in the block assessment proceedings, it could utilize entire information it had in its possession. In this context, it may be mentioned that in the case of CIT vs. Ravi Kant Jain, 250 ITR 141, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court observed that :- "... the addition under block assessment to be framed under Chapter XIV-B of the Act can be made on the basis of material found during the search operation. It is also admitted proposition after explanation to Section 158BA of the Act was inserted with retrospective effect from 1.4.1995 that regular assessment and block assessment can be framed separately." The Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of Malayil Bankers vs. ACIT, 236 ITR 869, observed that powers of ITO for f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the scope of the block period. So, the same is outside the scope of exercising jurisdiction under Chapter XIV-B and Section 158BA. Therefore, in view of Section 158BB including its amendment by inserting Clause FI w.e.f. 01.07.1995 retrospectively, we are of the opinion that the same have no application to the facts and circumstances of the case in hand. Hence, we decline to interfere with the impugned order passed by the Tribunal. The same is hereby sustained along with reasons mentioned therein. The answer to the substantial question of law is in favour of the assessee and against the department. Appeal No. 28 of 2006 (Dr. Chitwan Verma) On 18.01.2006, a Coordinate Bench of this Court has admitted the appeal on the following substantial questions of law:- "1. Whether on the facts and in the peculiar circumstances of the case, the learned ITAT was justified in holding that the assessed undisclosed income had been shown in the returns of M/s. Three Aces Construction & Consultants, filed at Delhi in which the assessee was herself a partner. 2. Whether the Tribunal has erred in law in directing the Assessing Officer to complete the block assessment only on the basis of material....