IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ITA.No. 200 of 2002()
1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. K. CHANDRA BABU, LETHA HUT,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES)
For Respondent :SRI.K.VINOD CHANDRAN
The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.N.RAVINDRAN
Dated :08/01/2009
O R D E R
C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & P.N.RAVINDRAN, JJ.
======================================
I.T.A.No.200 of 2002
======================================
Dated this the 8th day of January 2009
JUDGMENT
The appeal is filed against the order of the Tribunal
disposing of block assessment completed under Section 158BC
read with section 158 BD of the I.T.Act, 1961.
2. We have heard the learned standing counsel appearing for
the appellant and the learned counsel appearing for the
respondent.
3. The respondent was an employee of the State Treasury
Department. Based on the search conducted in the premises of
the respondent’s relative, notice was issued proposing block
assessment on the respondent. It is seen that except for one year
for all the other nine years in the block period, the department
had no case that the assessee had any income other than the
salary income which is below the taxable rate. Therefore the
dispute pertains to only one year that too pertaining to the sale
of property. The Tribunal allowed the assessee’s claim because
the only evidence of receipt is the one gathered by the
department from the books maintained by the assessee’s relative.
The assessee has furnished documentary evidence including bank
I.T.A.No.200 of 2002 2
records pertaining to sale proceeds received by him on the sale of
the property. The Tribunal was also not satisfied that the data
gathered during the inspection was sufficient to assess the
respondent on this income. We do not find any substantial
question of law arising from the order of the Tribunal.
Consequently the I.T.Appeal is dismissed.
C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE
P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE
css/