COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II Vs. ARUN DAVID

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal filed by the revenue against the order passed by the Income -tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench in I.T. (S & amp; S) A. No. 22/Coch/2006. This appeal is with reference to the block assessment for the period from 1.4.1996 to 18.12.2012. The facts of the case disclose that the assessee is a civil contractor. In response to a notice under Section 158BC, the assessee filed return showing the income as 'Nil'. The assessment was completed under Section 158BC determining the undisclosed income for the block period at Rs. 68,37,610/ -. The assessing officer found that the assessee had failed to disclose the income derived by him for carrying out the contract work and on the basis of documents, seized from the assessee, the undisclosed income was arrived at Rs. 8 lakhs for the work done for Sterling Holiday Resorts at Munnar. Similarly, for the work done at KHDP Factory at Moovattupuzha, the assessing officer, based on seized documents, computed undisclosed income at Rs. 1,25,420/ -. Some materials were obtained by the assessing officer, especially two agreements dated 23.9.1998 and 20.12.2000 executed between one T.J. George, Sri. N.C. Thomas and the assessee evidencing sale of petrol pump. Taking into consideration the possible investment that the assessee would have made in the acquisition of the said petroleum pump, the unaccounted investment of Rs. 40 lakhs was added to the income of the assessee. That apart, a further amount of Rs. 7,96,477/ - was treated as unaccounted amount received from Sri. N.C. Thomas as final settlement of IBP petrol pump.

(2.) THE assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income -Tax (Appeals), Kochi. The appellate authority deleted all these additions and the undisclosed income for the block period was reduced to Rs. 54,500/ -. The revenue preferred an appeal before the Tribunal and the Tribunal initially passed an ex parte order determining the undisclosed income as Rs. 17,76,400/ -. The assessee preferred an appeal before this Court as I.T.A. No. 191/2010 and by judgment dated 11.6.2010, this Court having set aside the order passed by the Tribunal, remitted back the matter to the Tribunal for fresh consideration. Pursuant to the same, the Tribunal revised the undisclosed income to Rs. 54,500/ -.

(3.) WHETHER , on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, -