TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1999 (10) TMI 11
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to be referred to this court : "1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal having held that such addition is not justified in block assessments was justified in adjudicating the issue on its merits ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified to hold that services were rendered by the liaison agents with reference to the additional evidence of counter signed order intents de hors the relevant pieces of evidence taken note of by the Assessing Officer ? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that an expenditure already claimed under the provisions of the Act cannot be termed as undisclosed inc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....premises of the directors ?" Out of the aforesaid questions, question No. 4 has been referred to this court by the Tribunal. So far as questions Nos. 1 to 3 and 5 to 8 are concerned, the Tribunal in its lengthy judgment has arrived 'at the conclusion that these questions are not referable as questions of law and hence, declined to refer the same to this court. It is in view of this order passed by the Tribunal that the Commissioner has made an application before this court under section 256(2) to direct the Tribunal to refer to this court, the questions of law, set out in para. 4 of the application. Earlier the assessee invoked the writ jurisdiction of this court seeking to challenge the notices issued to them under section 143(2) of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sed income, by Chapter XIV-B, is classified separately for the-purposes of assessment and is required to be worked out in the manner prescribed therein and treated to a higher rate of tax. This process did not disturb the assessments already made, of the previous years, and was only intended to sniff out what had remained hidden and not disclosed by the assessee. There would, therefore, be no overlapping in the nature of the assessment made under this Chapter of undisclosed income and the regular assessment made under section 143(3). The powers of regular assessment are kept intact and so are all the appellate, revisional and other powers affecting such regular assessment and all the statutory consequences flowing from the exercise of such ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s year included in the block period." Learned counsel for the Revenue further submitted that whatever material is collected during search and seizure has to be evolved and from there if any hidden income or some non-permissible deduction is found, then the same will be considered and will form part of block assessment and not regular assessment under section 143 despite the fact that the assessment is pending. We are not in a position to agree with the submission of learned counsel for the Revenue in view of the decision of this court. It is in this background as stated hereinabove that the questions are required to be considered. No question is framed to indicate that the decision rendered by the Tribunal is perverse. If at all the R....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as per his observation at page 16 of the assessment order in the case of Suman Paper and Boards Ltd.". Thus, it is clear that on appreciation of the evidence the Tribunal has rendered the decision and the Tribunal rightly rejected the application refusing to refer question-No. 1. So far as question No. 2 is concerned, learned counsel for the Revenue, submitted that at the appellate stage, additional evidence has been produced. That piece of evidence indicates the admission of the execution of an agreement by the parties. In the application no grievance is made that this piece of evidence was placed on record without giving any opportunity to the Revenue. There is nothing to indicate that the Revenue objected to the same. When additional ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... So far as questions Nos. 5 and 6 are concerned both are required to be considered together. It is required to be noted that for the earlier assessment years, depreciation was allowed by the Assessing Officer in the earlier assessment years after verifying the facts which were discovered during the earlier search carried out in the case of the assessee on August 21, 1986. The Tribunal has observed that in view of the fact that the premises were used by the assessee as its sales office, the expenditure on renovation incurred for the office was for the business purpose and, accordingly, the company is entitled to claim depreciation. The Tribunal has relied upon the decision of this court in the case of N. R. Paper and Board Ltd. [1998] 234 I....