2006 (1) TMI 73

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n Appeals Nos. 8 and 16 (ASR)/2003, in respect of the block period April 1, 1998 to November 17, 1999. According to the assessee, the order involves the following substantial question of law: "Whether, under the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in upholding the addition of Rs. 50,000 on the true interpretation of the provisions of Chapter XIV-B for making an assessment of undisclosed income for the block period without being based on any evidence or material found during the course of the search relatable to this addition of Rs. 50,000?" The background facts, giving rise to the appeal, in brief, are as follows: The assessee, a partnership firm, is engaged in the business of hotelier, catering and givi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....at it would be just and fair to peg the addition at Rs. 50,000 instead of Rs. 1,50,000 made by the Assessing Officer. Not being satisfied, the assessee as well as the Revenue took the matter in further appeal to the Tribunal. By the impugned order, the Tribunal has upheld the view taken by the Commissioner. Hence, the present appeal. We have heard Mr. P.C. Jain, learned counsel appearing for the assessee. Learned counsel has assailed the view taken by the lower appellate authorities mainly on the ground that the addition of Rs. 50,000, for the block period from April 1, 1989 to November 17, 1999, was unwarranted because the assessee had commenced its business only from April 1, 1998. It is also urged that income under section 158BB of....