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 TUESDAY, THE 25TH MARCH 2008 / 5TH CHAITHRA 1930 ITA.No. 23 of 2004() -------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 30/01/2004 IN I.T.(S&S) A.NO.7/COCH/2002 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH .................... APPELLANT -------------------------- SMT.KRISHNA VIVEK, KIVI INTERNATIONAL, TUTORS LANE, TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SRI.D.S.SREEKUMARAN SMT.T.S.MAYA RESPONDENTS: ------------- DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX, CIRCLE-I (1), TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SRI.PK.RAVEENDRANATHA MENON (SR) THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JJ. .................................................................... I.T.A. No.23 of 2004 .................................................................... Dated this the 25th day of March, 2008. JUDGMENT C.N.Ramachandran Nair, J. The appeal is filed against order of the Tribunal partly allowing assessee's appeal against the block assessment completed under Section 158BC of the Income Tax Act. We have heard counsel appearing for the appellant and Standing Counsel appearing for the Income Tax Department. 2. We find that though the Tribunal upheld the assessment, it granted substantial relief in quantum. The questions raised by the appellant are only questions of fact pertaining to the income estimated. Even though counsel for the appellant contended that block assessment is not based on any evidence gathered because there was no seizure of cash or documents, we find that the department collected information regarding investment in building, land etc., in the name of the assessee's husband and the assessee was engaged in acting as recruitment agency for employment of people abroad. Estimation of income is based on commission and other charges received for processing of visas, purchase of air tickets etc. Similarly, commission for recruitment is also fixed at market rates. The Tribunal has 2 gone into the facts and has granted reduction wherever possible. This court is entitled to interfere with order in appeal only on substantial questions of law. So long as the additions are based on materials, there is no justification for this court to interfere with the quantum of additions. The appeal, therefore, fails and is dismissed. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge pms