GEM GRANITES Vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE assessee has filed the above appeals as against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for the assessment years 1995-96 and 1996-97. The T.C.(A).No. 1150 of 2006 was admitted on the following substantial questions of law:-

(2.) THE T.C.(A).Nos. 1151 and 1152 of 2006 were admitted on the following substantial questions of law:-

(3.) AS far as the estimation of income on the basis of pro rata construction is concerned, the Tribunal pointed out that when unaccounted income on the basis of the diary had been considered for addition, the expenditure noted therein also had to be considered for the purpose of deduction. Thus, agreeing with the assessee on this issue, the Appellate Tribunal remanded the assessment back to the Officer to find out how much of the expenditure was allowable expenditure with respect to the particular project as claimed by the assessee. In the light of the above remand, the interest levy under Section 234B was also remanded back to work out the same depending on the outcome of the assessment proceedings. Aggrieved by this, the assesee has come before this Court on appeal questioning the interest levy under Section 234 B of the Act.