IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH MARCH 2008 / 6TH CHAITHRA 1930 ITA.No. 292 of 2002() --------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN IT (S & S) A.16/1997 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH .................... APPELLANT/APPELLANT/ASSESSEE --------------------------------------------- M/S.V.T.M.BUILDERS, PALARIVATTOM, COCHIN, REPRESENTED BY MANAGING PARTNER B.M.VARGHSE. BY ADV. SRI.C.KOCHUNNY NAIR SRI.DALE P.KURIEN RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENT/REVENUE ------------------------------- THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, COCHIN. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.R.MENON(SR.),SR.COUNSEL FOR IT FOR R SRI.GEORGE K. GEORGE, SC FOR IT FOR R THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C .N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JJ. -------------------------------------------- I.T.A. No. 292 OF 2002 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of March, 2008 JUDGMENT C.N. Ramachandran Nair,J. This is an appeal filed against the order of the Tribunal confirming block assessment made on the assessee after search. Search was conducted in the residential premises of the partners and pursuant to the same block assessment was made. According to the assessee, since search was not conducted in the office of the firm, block assessment cannot be made on the firm. We are unable to accept this contention because during search of residential premises of the partners, it was revealed that business was carried on by the firm in which searched persons were partners. We do not find any substance in this contention raised by the assessee. The next question raised is with regard to jurisdiction of the Officer who passed the assessment order. According to the assessee, file was transferred by the Commissioner of Income-tax and not by the Board of Direct Taxes and 2 consequently the order is invalid. This issue is covered against the assessee by the decision of this Court in 268 I.T.R. 465. Therefore there is no justification to interfere with the order on this ground also. Another question pertains to the evidence given by the Manager of Penta Estate who gave statement to the Investigating team. We do not find any question of law arising from this issue because Tribunal after examining the statement found it as admissible and relevant for assessment. We therefore dismiss the appeal. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge. (T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge. kk 3