M.R.SHAH, J. - (1.) As common question of law and facts arise in this group of appeals, they are disposed of by this common judgment and order.
(2.) Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned common judgment and order passed by the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, "C" Bench, Ahmedabad, passed in IT (SS) A Nos. 138 to 141/AHD/2011 for AY 200102 to 200405, by which, the learned Tribunal has allowed the said appeals and has directed to AO to delete the addition made under Section 153 A of the Act for AY 200001 to 200405, the Revenue has preferred present Appeals with the following proposed questions of law. "A. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is correct in narrowing down the scope of assessment u/s 153 A in respect of completed assessments by holding that only undisclosed income and undisclosed assets detected during the search could be brought to tax ? B. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is correct in law in holding that the scope of Section 153 A is limited to assessing only search related income, thereby denying Revenue the opportunity of taxing other escaped income that comes to the notice of the Assessing Officer ? C. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in limiting the scope of Section 153 A only to undisclosed income when as per the section the Assessing Officer has to assess the total income of the six assessment years ? D. Whether the findings of the Tribunal that no incriminating material is found is perverse in as much as incriminating documents were found, though pertaining to the other Assessment Years which could be linked with the present Assessment Year ?" 2. A search was conducted at the premises of the assessee on 10.02.2006. Therefore, the proceedings under Section 153 A of the Act was initiated by the Assessing Officer by issuing notice under Section 153(A)(a) of the Act. That on the basis of the incriminating material seized by the department for the period of AY 200405 onwards, the Assessing Officer made the addition for AY 200001 to 200405. On the basis of the material collected during the search conducted on 10.02.2016, the Assessing Officer denied the capital gain claimed by the assessee and directed to made addition treating the income as business income. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the assessment orders, which were on the basis of proceedings under Section 153 A of the Act, the assessee preferred appeals before the learned CIT(A). The learned CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer. The orders passed by the learned CIT(A) were carried before the learned Tribunal by way of appeals being IT (SS) A Nos. 138 to 141/AHD/2011. Relying upon its earlier decision of this Court in the case of CIT v. Klabul Chawla reported in (2016) 280 ITR 573 (Delhi) and having observed that no incriminating material was found with respect to the AY 200001 to 200405, at the time of search, which was conducted on 10.02.2006 and therefore, the Assessing Officer was not justified in making the addition and by holding that only undisclosed income and undisclosed assets deducted during the search could be brought to tax and consequently has directed the AO to delete the addition made while passing the assessment order under Section 153 A of the Act. 2.2. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned common judgment and order passed by the learned Tribunal in quashing and setting aside the addition made by the AO while framing assessment under Section 153 A of the Act, the Revenue has preferred present Tax Appeals with the following proposed questions of law . "A. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is correct in narrowing down the scope of assessment u/s 153 A in respect of completed assessments by holding that only undisclosed income and undisclosed assets detected during the search could be brought to tax ? B. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is correct in law in holding that the scope of Section 153 A is limited to assessing only search related income, thereby denying Revenue the opportunity of taxing other escaped income that comes to the notice of the Assessing Officer ? C. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in limiting the scope of Section 153 A only to undisclosed income when as per the section the Assessing Officer has to assess the total income of the six assessment years ? D. Whether the findings of the Tribunal that no incriminating material is found is perverse in as much as incriminating documents were found, though pertaining to the other Assessment Years which could be linked with the present Assessment Year ?"
(3.) We have heard Shri Manish Bhatt, learned counsel for the Revenue and Shri S.N. Soparkar, learned counsel for the Assessee. At the outset, it is required to be noted that dispute is with respect to block assessment under Section 153 A of the Act for the AY 200001 to 200405. It is required to be noted that search was conducted on 10.02.2006. On the basis of the search conducted on 10.02.2006, some incriminating material was detected/found for the period of AY 200405 onwards for the assessment block period under Section 153 A were framed by the Assessing Officer and the Assessing Officer made the addition. However, it is required to be noted and does not seem to be any dispute except for AY 200405, that at the time of search conducted on 10.02.2006 no incriminating material was found with respect to the period/assessment year 200102 to 200304. Therefore, the learned Tribunal directed the AO to delete the addition made in the assessment under Section 153 A of the Act by holding that only undisclosed income and undisclosed assets detected during the search could be brought to tax. Therefore, the short question which is posed for consideration of this Court is whether the learned Tribunal is justified in holding so ?;