2009 (11) TMI 524

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s not based solely on one document, namely, annexure E seized from the assessee - assessee submitted that annexure E does not contain sufficient materials to make assessment against the assessee - Held that: - Tribunal has not even gone through the assessment order and the first appellate order against which the second appeal was filed before it - Tribunal has not exercised jurisdiction properly, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ng to sale transaction, receipt of amounts, etc., stated to be containing the signature of the assessee, and sworn statements recorded under section 132(4) of the Act. Even though assessment was confirmed in first appeal, the Tribunal on second appeal just relying on the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT v. P. V. Kalyansundaram [2007] 294 ITR 49 allowed the appeal by quashing the block assessme .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e assessment. The Tribunal assumed that the assessment is solely based on one item of seized paper which is produced as annexure E here and the Tribunal therefore cancelled the assessment stating that the noting in such rough paper cannot be the sole basis for a block assessment. In the first place, the Supreme Court does state in so many words that notings in a scrap of paper seized in the course .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X