MAMATHA MOTELS Vs. ASSTT. CIT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal filed by the assessee challenging the order passed by he Tribunal with reference to block assessment for the period from 1 -4 -1986 to 12 -12 -1996.

(2.) THE appellant is a firm running bar attached hotel and restaurant. A search was conducted under section 132 of the Income Tax Act at the business premises of the appellant on 12 -12 -1996. Thereafter, the assessment proceedings were initiated under section 158BC of the Income Tax Act for the block period from 1 -4 -1986 to 12 -12 -1996. The assessment was completed for the said period as per order dt. 26 -8 -1998 fixing the undisclosed income for the assessment years 1993 -94 to 1997 -98 as Rs. 1,06,62,370. The matter was taken in appeal before the Tribunal, Cochin Bench by way of first appeal as per the relevant law for appeal prevailing at the time of search by virtue of section 253(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act as the search was before 1 -1 -1997. The Tribunal set aside the block assessment order with a direction to consider the matter afresh after giving an opportunity to the erstwhile partners of the firm. Thereafter, a fresh assessment was made for the block period as per order dt. 25 -3 -2002 and determining the undisclosed income at Rs. 1,06,62,370. Annexure. A is the assessment order dt. 25 -3 -2002. The appellant preferred an appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal directed the assessing officer to allow deduction of Rs. 3 lakhs in respect of bar licence fee from the undisclosed income determined. In respect of the assessment year 1994 -95, determination of undisclosed income was set aside and the issue was remitted to the assessing officer. In respect of assessment years 1995 -96 and 1996 -97, the same direction was issued. In respect of assessment year 1997 -98, the determination of undisclosed income was confirmed. Annexure. B is the said order. The assessing officer thereafter made fresh assessments pursuant to the directions contained in Annexure. B appellate order for the assessment years 1993 -94, 1994 -95, 1995 -96 and 1996 -97 and determining the undisclosed income for the block period as Rs. 91,04,290. Annex. C is the said order dt. 11 -12 -2007. The appellant preferred an appeal before the Tribunal and the Tribunal sustained the disputed additions as per order dt. 9 -12 -2011 and produced as Annexure D.

(3.) THE main contention urged by the learned counsel for the appellant was the manner in which the assessment had been made by the assessing officer. It is clear that in respect of assessment year 1993 -94, the contention raised by the assessee was that there has been a mistake in recording the figure of purchase and its income. In fact, the assessing officer computed the income for the year on the basis of the seized material, i.e. the P&L a/c for the period from 12 -10 -1992 to 31 -3 -1993. The purchase of liquor debited to the said account is at Rs. 12,50,865 when total amount comes to Rs. 13,93,882 as evident from the copy of the ledger account. After referring to the Tribunals order dt. 28 -3 -2007, it is found that the Tribunal has confirmed the assessment and the remand was only to consider the transaction with reference to the payment of licence fee of Rs. 3,00,000 and whether it would be deducted or not. In other words, as far as the determination of total income for the assessment year 1993 -94 is concerned, Rs. 7,23,754 was declared as undisclosed income. Therefore, we do not think that there is any further matter to be considered as far as the assessment year 1993 -94 is concerned.