2014 (10) TMI 535

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the following substantial questions of law:- "A) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the ACIT Central Circle-I, Jalandhar, was vested with valid jurisdiction to make regular assessment under section 143(3), when the jurisdiction was transferred to him to make block assessment under section 158 BC, which was dropped for non-execution of warrants of authorization when the cash seized was not handed over by the FEMA authorities? B) Whether the Tribunal was correct in confirming the regular assessment made under section 143(3) by ACIT Central Circle-I, Jalandhar, for Assessment Year 2001-02 as valid, without first deciding whether he was vested with a competent jurisdiction over the appellant, when the block assessment had....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ependent statement recorded by Income tax authorities? F) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the order of the Tribunal is perverse and hence illegal being contrary to facts and evidence brought on record? 2. Briefly the facts as pleaded in the instant appeal may be noticed. On 24.12.2000, a search was conducted by the authorities under the Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA) at the residential premises of the assessee and certain documents along with cash amount of Rs. 12,30,000/- was seized. The vehicle of the assessee was intercepted by the Police at Phagwara on 29.1.2001 while the assessee was on the way back to Jalandhar from Delhi and cash amount of Rs. 15,85,350/- out of Rs. 16,00,000/- was taken in custody. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed 26.3.2004 (Annexure A-1) at a total income of Rs. 28,68,340/-. The amount of Rs. 12,30,000/- declared in block assessment was questioned and added besides making another addition of Rs. 16,00,000/- being credit received from Mr. Banerjee, as advance, against the sale of property at Jalandhar as per agreement dated 27.1.2001 (Annexure A-4). Commission income of Rs. 10 lacs was also assessed from alleged distribution of Hawala money though it was telescoped against the addition of Rs. 12.30 lacs cash seized. Feeling aggrieved against the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) who vide order dated 19.3.2010 (Annexure A-2) upheld the order of the Assessing Officer and dismissed the appeal. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ibed on the undisclosed income of the block period under Section 113 of the Act which is higher than the rate of taxation on the income assessed under Section 143(3) of the Act. Learned counsel for the assessee-appellant was not able to refer to any provision whereby it could be held that there was any bar to frame regular assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act in the present case. Furthermore, learned counsel has also not been able to show that any prejudice has been caused to the assessee by framing of regular assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act. 5. In view of the above and in the facts and circumstances, the assessment framed under Section 143(3) of the Act was in consonance with the provisions of the statute. Thus, the fir....