COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Vs. P.P.JOSE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these Income Tax Appeals by the revenue impugn the order dtd. 27/2/2004 in ITA No.31/Coch/2003 and ITA No.32/Coch/2003 respectively. The Appellate Tribunal by the aforesaid order had disposed the appeals preferred by the assessee and the Revenue against the order of the First Appellate Authority in an appeal preferred by the assessee against an order of assessment under Section158BC read with Sec. 143 of the Income Tax Act for the block period 1/4/1989 to 23/12/1999.

(2.) The brief facts necessary for the disposal of these Income Tax Appeals are as follows:

(3.) Aggrieved by the order of assessment, the assessee preferred an appeal before the First Appellate Authority. The First Appellate Authority while susbtantially confirming the demand of the Assessing Officer, modified the demand by fixing the undisclosed income at two times the running stock of the assessee during the various assessment years covered in the block period, as against three times the running stock that was taken by the Assessing Officer. The First Appellate Authority also restricted the said addition to only five of the 10 years covered by the block period on the finding that incriminatory material recovered during the time of search pertained only to those five years and not to the other years covered under the block period. The five years in respect of which the undisclosed income was directed to be computed were 1995-1996, 1997-1998, 1998-1999, 1999-2000, and 2000-2001. The First Appellate Authority also confirmed the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer in relation to the expenditure claimed under Sec. 40(A)(3) and added back these amounts to the calculation of the undisclosed income. The assessment order was, therefore, modified by the First Appellate Authority only to a limited extent.