9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (4) TMI 1356X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts individual corporate capacity. In the absence of such a search on appellant company, no assessment can be framed under s. 158BC. Hence, the block assessment order dt. 28th Sept., 2001 is liable to be quashed. 8. The assessment order dt. 28th Sept., 2001 passed under s. 158BC(c) r/w s. 143(3) is further illegal, since no notice under s. 143(2) was issued to the appellant company prior to passing the impugned block assessment order. 2. Ground No. 8 was not pressed and the same is dismissed as not pressed. As far as ground No. 7 is concerned, the facts material for adjudication of the same are as follows : The assessee is a company in the business of multimedia and its activities are related to providing various services to its clients i.e. editing, graphics, dubbing etc. for new advertisement films supplied by the clients. M/s Radan Multimedia Ltd. is proprietor of sound recording and video processing studio styled as Magikraft operating from 8, Dhanraj Mahal, Apollo Bunder, Mumbai-1. The company was incorporated on 1st May, 1986 and its old name was Radan Tapes Tubes Ltd. A search and seizure action under s. 132(1) of the IT Act, 1961, was carried out at the busines ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Multimedia Ltd. is invalid and the assessment is liable to be quashed on this ground. Though ground No. 7 is not broad enough to cover the plea sought to be raised by the learned counsel for the assessee, we deem it fit to consider the same for the reason that the said plea being a legal plea which can be considered and decided on the basis of material on record. 4. In the decision of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Smt. Vandana Verma (supra) it has been held as follows : In view of the provisions of s. 132 of the IT Act, which specifically lays down the conditions precedent for authorizing any officer to enter and search the premises that he had information in his possession in consequence of which he has reason to believe that the person concerned is in possession of money, bullion etc. and only then, he will sign the warrant of authorization. In the instant case, undisputedly, warrant of authorization under s. 132 of the IT Act was issued in the joint name of Mudit Verma and Vandana Verma and as such, the authority who signed the warrant had information in his possession and had reason to believe that Mudit Verma and Vandana Verma are in possession o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t should be framed either as AOP or as BOI. 5. The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that it could be argued on behalf of the Revenue that the word and does not appear in the description of persons in whose names warrant of authorization was issued in the present case, whereas in the case decided by the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Smt. Vandana Verma (supra), the warrant of authorization was issued in the names of two persons Mudit Verma and Mrs. Vandana Verma and, therefore, the case of the assessee is distinguishable. In this regard learned counsel for the assessee relied on the decision of the Ahmedabad Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Dr. Mansukh Kanjibhai Shah vs. Asstt. CIT (2010) 41 DTR (Ahd)(Trib) 353, wherein the facts were that the authorization was issued in the name of K.N. Shah Charitable Trust, Mansukh Bhai K. Shah . The Hon'ble Tribunal held as follows : The warrant of authorization was also executed upon the bank manager of Indian Overseas Bank in respect of several bank accounts of the trust. Thus no warrant of authorization is issued in the name of assessee in his individual capacity and no warrant of authorization ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Cargo Group concerns . It was in this context that the Hon'ble High Court held that CIT(A) could not have considered the issue of validity of assessment on the ground that the search under s. 132 of the Act itself was invalid because of the warrant of search not being in the name of the assessee. The Hon'ble High Court further on merits made the observation that such defects will not vitiate the order of assessment. 7. Further reliance was also placed on the decision of the Bangalore Bench of Tribunal in the case of Embassy Classic (P) Ltd. Anr. vs. Asstt. CIT, ITA Nos. 811, 976 938/Bang/2009, asst. yr. 2005-06 order dt. 22nd July, 2010, wherein the Tribunal has held as follows : We considered the issue. The Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Smt. Vandana Verma (2009) 227 CTR (All) 388: (2009) 31 DTR (All) 214 was in fact examining the case where a joint warrant of authorization was issued. Both the persons mentioned in the warrant were living in the same premises. It was in such circumstances, the Hon'ble Court held that warrant was issued and search was carried out as a single unit and, therefore, the consequential assessment should also have bee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... adhana Rayon House, 2nd Floor, Dr. D.N. Road, Fort, Mumbai. 10. In the decision of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Smt. Vandana Verma (supra) the warrant of authorization was in the names of Mr. Mudit Verma and Mrs. Vandana Verma . We have already seen that the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court while deciding this issue had laid great emphasis on the expression and and had come to the conclusion that the warrant was issued in the joint names of Mr. Mudit Verma and Mrs. Vandana Verma. In the present case however, the entities involved are three limited companies. There is only a comma after the names of each of the companies. Admittedly these companies had common office premises. In such circumstances we are of the view that it cannot be said that the warrant of authorization is in the joint names of three companies. The warrant of authorization in the present case is a common warrant in the case of the three companies. Thus the facts in the case of Smt. Vandana Verma (supra) decided by the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court and the case of the assessee are materially different. 11. With regard to the decision of the Ahmedabad Bench of Tribunal in the ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sments. The above observations of the Hon'ble Kerala High Court are clearly applicable to the facts of the present case since the three companies had a common office. For the reasons given above we reject the arguments of the learned counsel for the assessee that the block assessment order in the present case is invalid. Ground No. 7 raised by the assessee is accordingly dismissed. 12. We will now deal with the merits of the addition made by the Revenue authorities, which are challenged by the assessee in ground Nos. 1 to 6, which read as follows : 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, apparently the learned CIT(A) erred in holding that the appellant company was fully covered by the provisions of Chapter XIV-B of the IT Act, 1961, and that the AO was right in assuming he had jurisdiction under provisions of the said chapter. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the AO in treating 'purchase of plant and machinery and films from Delhi parties', as fictitious and/or bogus, during the block period. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) er ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nery ₹ 1,18,07,154 15. The amount of ₹ 1,04,15,121 was addition to the asset and was written off at 100 per cent claimed as depreciation. The amount of ₹ 1,04,15,121 claimed as depreciation comprised of the following items, i.e. : A. (i) Purchase of films from Gemini Oil (P) Ltd. (Bill No. Misc. 01) ₹ 34,56,000 (ii) Purchase of films from Gemini Oil (P) Ltd. (Bill No. Misc. 02) ₹ 45,00,750 (iii) Purchase of films from Gemini Oil (P) Ltd. (Bill No. Misc. 03) ₹ 20,45,300 ₹ 1,00,02,050 B. Payment to Jethamal Suthar for carpentary work ₹ 4,13,071 ₹ 1,04,15,121 It was the claim of the assessee that a payment of ₹ 4,13,071 was made to Jethamal Suthar for carpentry work pertaining to the making of furniture etc., and instead of being debited to the addition to furniture has been inadvertently debited under the head 'purchase of films'. Sim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3-1996) ₹ 15,00,000 Sudeep Mercantile Co. Ltd. had purchased these machineries from Video World, Delhi. 18. Apart from the above, the assessee had also taken on lease machinery as per following details : Date Name of finance company/financial institution Value of machinery 1. 5-6-1995 Alpic Finance Ltd. (repossessed by Alpic) ₹ 25,00,000 2. 7-6-1995 Alpic Finance Ltd. ₹ 33,00,000 3. 30-9-1995 IDBI ₹ 8,80,000 ₹ 66,80,000 Alpic Finance Ltd. and financial institution namely IDBI had purchased these machineries from Sudeep Mercantile Co. Ltd. and Sudeep Mercantile Co. Ltd. purchased the machinery mentioned in (i) above from Video World and Items (ii) and (iii) from New Indian Electronics. 19. As can be observed from the claim as made above by the assesse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ear sales-tax numbers. Secondly, nowhere transportation and other expenses related with the transportation have been debited to P L a/c of the said companies i.e. M/s Sudeep Mercantile Ltd. and Gemini (P) Ltd. The statements of the directors of two companies M/s Sudeep Mercantile and Gemini Oil (P) Ltd., were also recorded by the survey party. The AO while finalizing the assessment observed that the statement given in the survey was very evasive. All the three directors replied that they did not remember much of the transactions as taken place somewhere few years back. The director of M/s Sudeep Mercantile Ltd. Mr. Dinesh Seth in his statement could not even tell how the payments to the Delhi parties were made. It is also observed by the AO that the transaction of the assessee with M/s Sudeep Mercantile Ltd. in respect of hire-purchase agreement, the machineries were purchased by Sudeep Mercantile Ltd. from Delhi based party only. Thus, on the findings made in the survey, the AO made addition for the financial expenses as well as disallowed depreciation being the expenses related to bogus purchases of machineries from Delhi parties in the order of assessment dt. 31st March, 1999 pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mpany had claimed depreciation on such purchases/hire-purchases and blank bill books of the above two Delhi based concerns have been seized from his office. According to the AO this was something strange inasmuch as there was no reason for the blank bill books of the Delhi based concerns lying in the business premises of Shri Dinesh Seth. In view of these facts, Shri Dinesh Seth was once again asked by the AO to explain as to why the blank bill books of New India Electronics and Video World were lying in his office. In response to this, Shri Dinesh Seth stated that these bill books might have been left behind by the parties through oversight. 24. Thereafter the AO referred to the following circumstances which could go to show that the transaction of purchase of machineries by the assessee referred to above as well as transaction of lease of machineries as well as hire-purchase transactions were bogus : (a) The telephone number mentioned on the sale bills of Video World in fact belongs in the name of Mrs. Alka Soni, Jt. Director of Defence Ministry. Similarly, telephone number mentioned in the sale bill of Ravi Telecast Co. was actually found belonging to one Mr. I. Chauthim, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat in the ledger accounts of the said five Delhi based companies, the assessee had debited the accounts of the parties on account of 'service charges' which the assessee claims to have charged for processing the advertisements of soaps, shirts, trousers, coke etc. on behalf of the aforesaid concerns. The payments for supply of machineries were made by the assessee to the Delhi based parties after adjusting the services charges which those parties had to pay to the assessee. The assessee however could not give any evidence regarding the services that it rendered to the five Delhi based parties for which they had made payments to the assessee. 25. The assessee submitted before the AO that the claim of depreciation on purchase of plant and machinery has been admitted by the Department during the course of finalization of regular assessments under s. 143(3) in the relevant years covered by block period. It was further contended that the papers submitted during the course of regular assessment proceedings were only found and seized during the course of search action. It was contended that since no undisclosed income was found as a result of search, the AO has no jurisdiction ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eferred to the various circumstances which showed that the purchase of plant and machinery by the assessee or the sister concerns of assessee from the Delhi parties was not genuine. We have already narrated these circumstances in the earlier paras of this order and they are not being repeated. 27. As already stated a very important fact that has a bearing on a decision on this case is the fact that at the time of survey as well as the search all the machineries were physically found in the business premises of the assessee. A list of machineries found in the premises searched was handed over to Dinesh Seth, director of assessee, on 19th Sept., 2001. By his notice dt. 18th Sept., 2001, the AO required the assessee to tally list of machinery. On 6th Aug., 1999, the assessee's premises had been sealed for reverification of their preliminary inventory and complete their inventory of the machineries installed at 8, Dhanraj Mahal as well as Sadhana Rayon House. The premises were opened and resealed on 23rd Aug., 1999 and again on 1st Sept., 1999 the same were opened and sealed. In the course of Department's action of preparing the inventory, the Department sought assessee' ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -10-1992 1993-94 New India Electronics Radan Tapes Tubes Ltd. 42,39,000 3. 15-10-1992 1993-94 Ravi Telecast Co. Radan Tapes Tubes Ltd. 38,00,000 4. 2-11-1992 1993-94 International Data Products Radan Tapes Tubes Ltd. 23,85,000 5. 29-9-1992 1993-94 Video World Radan Tapes Tubes Ltd. 15,90,000 6. 16-5-1994 1995-96 Video World Radan Tapes Tubes Ltd. 58,21,700 7. 7-6-1994 1995-96 New India Electronics Radan Tapes Tubes Ltd. 61,77,200 8. 17-2-1994 1995-96 Sonic Communications Gemini Oils 34,56,000 9. 3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he inventory Remarks (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) 1. Bill dt. 13-10-92 of Sonic Comm. appearing at serial No. 1 Production editor (Netacam) comprising of key board, interface modules, display monitor, one tone, record pay back adaptor valued ₹ 19,13,000 Item at serial No. 16 of page No. 29 Sony remote control for umatice player make-editing-BVE-600/V/FG /10/46/1984 The description in Col. (c) differs with description in Col. (E) 2. Bill dt. 14-10-92 of New India Electronics appearing at serial No. 2 CVR-65 Betacan SP professional studio editing recorder, PAL systme with dynamic tracking-2 numbers Item at serial No. 15 on page No. 30 Sony edit recorder-play back of video make-micro 1202/BVW-60 The description in Col. (C) differs with description in Col. (E) Component ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -B above in the form of a chart filed before us. On perusal of the same, we are of the view that the stand of the assessee in this regard has to be accepted. Further we also find that the CIT(A) in his order at p. 46 para 4.3 has categorically held that all plant and machineries were found at the time of survey/search. It is the stand of the CIT(A) that existence of plant and machineries available at the business premises of the assessee are not supported by purchases from 5 Delhi based parties and that it was not clear as to how those plant and machineries came into possession of the assessee. Thereafter, the CIT(A) has gone on to hold that ownership of the machinery should be proved by the assessee to claim depreciation. We in the circumstances have to hold that physically all the machineries were found at the time of survey/search. The AO has not dealt with the above explanation of the assessee. The AO thus disallowed the claim for depreciation in the various assessment years comprised in the block period and treated the same as undisclosed income for the block period. The following chart gives the depreciation so disallowed and treated as undisclosed income : ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 82,77,627 25% 20,69,406 Total 5,72,94,917 30. The AO thereafter found that the following were the financial expenses claimed and allowed to the assessee in various assessment years comprised in the block period. Since the ultimate supplier of the machineries, which were the subject-matter of the hire-purchase/lease agreements, were the very same 5 Delhi based parties, the AO was of the view that the financial expenses claimed were also bogus. Accordingly the AO treated the financial expenses claimed in the various assessment years comprised in the block period as undisclosed income of the assessee. The details in this regard were as follows : Sl. No. Asst. yr. Details of financial expenses claimed and allowed 1. 1996-97 Interest on hire-purchase agreement 10,92,692 Compensatory financial charges 12,88,659 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aside by the CIT(A) for fresh consideration in the light of submissions made by the assessee before him. According to the AO, since the issue has also cropped up during the proceedings under s. 158BC, the disallowance was being made on substantive basis in the block assessment. Further, the AO observed that disallowance of ₹ 53,21,021 was made by the AO during the course of assessment proceedings under s. 143(3) for asst. yr. 1998-99. This assessment was contested by the assessee before appellate authorities and the appeal for the year was pending. According to the AO, the seized papers revealed that the financial charges are claimed in relation to bogus purchases of plant and machinery and therefore not allowable. Therefore, the disallowance of financial charge for asst. yr. 1998-99 at ₹ 53,21,021 was also made in the block assessment under s. 158BC. However, since the addition was made on substantive basis during the course of assessment under s. 143(3), disallowance was being made in the block assessment on protective basis. 32. Before CIT(A) the assessee raised issues with regard to validity of the impugned additions made in a block assessment proceeding under Ch ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ected. 33. On merits of the additions made by the AO, the CIT(A) confirmed the order of the AO. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee has raised grounds 1 to 6 which we have already set out in the earlier paras of this order. 34. We will take up for consideration ground No. 1 with regard to validity of the additions made under Chapter XIV-B of the Act raised in ground No. 1 referred to above. 35. On the above ground the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that in asst. yr. 1996-97 in the course of assessment under s. 143(3) of the Act, the AO in order to verify the claim of purchases from 5 Delhi parties conducted a survey on 23rd March, 1999 and all the evidence, purchase vouchers of machinery and books of accounts were before the Department. On the basis of survey proceedings the addition was made by the Department in for asst. yr. 1996-97 for assessment order. All these facts were known to the Department at the time of survey and this fact is mentioned in the remand report of the AO filed before CIT(A) which is at p. 430 of Vol. II (para 31) and the assessment order under s. 143(3). No addition can be made in the block assessment on the basis of doc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from your premises. What are these ? Ans. They appear to be delivery challan and invoice book of New India Electronics. Q. 72. Why are these lying at your office ? Ans. I have no idea. It is possible the party might have left them here. Q. 73. I am showing you Annexs. A-4 and A-5 seized from your premises. What are these ? Ans. They appear to be delivery challan and invoice book of Video World. Q. 74. Why are these lying at your office ? Ans. I don't know how it has come here. Q. 75. You have purchased goods from New India Electronics and Video World and have claimed depreciation thereon. The only evidence you have regarding transactions with these two concerns is their sale bills. The blank sale bill books of these concerns have been seized from your office. Is it possible that you yourself have prepared these bills ? Ans. I state that if these bills were found from my office then the only reason is that they may have been left behind by the parties due to an oversight. It is often seen that many people forget their bags, diaries, bill books, wallets which they collect subsequently in case they remember otherwise remains at our office. Q. 76. Do ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 16. The assessment for the asst. yr. 1993-94 was completed under s. 143(1)(a) dt. 25th Oct., 1994. 40. The IT return for the asst. yr. 1994-95 was filed on 30th Nov., 1994. The same was revised on 15th March, 1995. A copy of the revised return forms part of the compilation at pp. 746-747 of paper book IV filed by the assessee before us. The assessment for the asst. yr. 1994-95 was completed under s. 143(3) of the IT Act, 1961 on 30th Oct., 1996. The assessee had claimed depreciation of ₹ 62,15,627.65 on plant and machinery as per the depreciation chart filed along with the computation of total income, copies of which are at pp. 748-749 of the assessee's paper book. The claim of depreciation on plant and machinery was allowed by the AO in the order passed under s. 143(3) of the Act. 41. The IT return for the asst. yr. 1995-96 was filed on 30th Nov., 1995. A copy of the said return forms part of the compilation at pp. 750 and 751. A copy of the audited balance sheet, P L a/c as at 31st March, 1995 together with tax audit report was also filed along with the return of income. The assessment for the asst. yr. 1995-96 was completed under s. 143(3) of the IT Act, 1961 on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or the asst. yr. 1998-99 was filed on 30th Nov., 1998. A copy of the return forms part of the compilation at pp. 761 and 762. Depreciation on plant and machinery had been claimed by the assessee at ₹ 87,82,392. The assessee had claimed deduction on account of finance charges paid to Alpic Finance (lease rent), Stock Pole (hire-purchase payment) and IDBI (compensatory finance charges) in all totalling to ₹ 54,21,081. In the order of assessment under s. 143(3) of the Act, the AO disallowed depreciation of ₹ 86,81,527 and interest of ₹ 2,16,457. The AO relied on findings of asst. yr. 1996-97 while making the aforesaid additions. 45. For asst. yr. 1999-2000 the return of income was not due as on the date of search viz., 7th Aug., 1999. In terms of the provisions of s. 158BB(1)(d) of the Act, where the due date of filing the return of income under s. 139(1) of the Act has not expired, the undisclosed income has to be computed based on the entries made in the books of account or other documents maintained by the assessee in the normal course of search (sic'business), before the date of search. Admittedly such entries in the books of account regarding deprec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cized in print) portion in the definition of undiclsoed income was added by the Finance Act, 2002 which has amended the definition of undisclosed income in s. 158B(b) with retrospective effect from 1st July, 1995. 49. Explanation to s. 158BA(2) inserted by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1998 with retrospective effect from 1st July, 1995, reads as follows : Explanation : For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that' (a) the assessment made under this chapter shall be in addition to the regular assessment in respect of each previous year included in the block period; (b) the total undisclosed income relating to the block period shall not include the income assessed in any regular assessment as income of such block period. (c) the income assessed in this chapter shall not be included in the regular assessment of any previous year included in the block period. 50. The provisions of s. 158BB(1) of the Act lay down the computation of undisclosed income of the block period. The same reads as follows : 158BB. Computation of undisclosed income of the block period.'(1) The undisclosed income of the block period shall be the aggregate of the total income o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment to s. 158BB with retrospective effect from 1st July, 1995, by adding the words ''and such other materials or information as are available with the AO and relatable to such evidence has further widened the scope of making assessment of undisclosed income. 52. In Mange Ram Mittal vs. Asstt. CIT (supra), the Tribunal examined the scope of the above amendments to the various provisions of Chapter XIV-B of the Act, for making block assessments, in the following words : The computation of undisclosed income of the block period in a block assessment must be related to evidence found as a result of search proceedings. The Finance Act, 2002, by the amendment to s. 158BB with retrospective effect from 1st July, 1995, added the words 'and relatable to such evidence' : the undisclosed income has to be computed on the basis of evidence found as a result of search and/or other materials or information relatable to such evidence. At the same time it cannot be concluded that 'undisclosed income' to be computed under the provisions of s. 158BC should be confined to the evidence found during the course of the search. Even after the amendment by the Finance Act, 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ithout there being any relationship whatsoever with an evidence found as a result of search, cannot form part of undisclosed income to be brought to block assessment under the provisions of s. 158BC. 53. We shall now proceed to examine the sequence of events to find out, if there was evidence found as a result of search and whether such other material or information relatable to the evidence found in the course of search was gathered by the AO to disallow depreciation on plant and machinery and the finance charges. In the course of assessment for asst. yr. 1997-98, the AO noticed that M/s Gemini Oil (P) Ltd. and M/s Sudeep Mercantile (P) Ltd. are concerns having the same registered office address. The AO further noticed that all items supplied to Radan Multimedia Ltd. by Gemini Oil (P) Ltd. and Sudeep Mercantile Ltd. were purchased from four Delhi based parties. Therefore, a survey under s. 133A of the IT Act was conducted on 23rd March, 1999 in the office of M/s Radan Multimedia Ltd., Aradhana Rayon House, Dr. D.N. Road, Mumbai, wherein it was found that M/s Radan Multimedia's chairman is Ashok Seth, its Vice President is Mr. Dinesh Seth, his brother, who in turn is direct ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... parties so that the assessee could claim higher rate of depreciation. However there is no evidence found as a result of search or material relatable to evidence found as a result of search, which can be the basis for coming to such conclusion in a block assessment. Such conclusions cannot be supported only from adverse circumstances pointed out by the AO in the order of assessment in an assessment made under Chapter XIV-B of the Act, where the scope of undisclosed income is quite narrow. We are of the view that the disallowance of depreciation and finance charges on the ground that they were undisclosed income detected as a result of evidence found in the course of search or evidence relatable to the evidence found in the course of search, cannot be sustained. We however make it clear that the issue is considered only in the light of the specific provisions of Chapter XIV-B of the Act. We leave the question as to whether the impugned disallowance can be made in the regular assessment, open. Such disallowance are already subject-matter of appeal in some of the assessment years comprised in the block period and the question regarding the disallowances in such proceedings is left ope ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
