RAJESH BALIA, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) THIS appeal is directed against the order of Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench, Jodhpur, dt. 9th May, 2003 (reported as Asstt. CIT v. Ramesh Chand Soni (2003) 81 TTJ (Jd) 253), deciding cross -appeals filed by the assessee and the Revenue in respect of block assessment period 1st April, 1988 to 15th July, 1998, pursuant to a search which has taken place on the premises of the assessee in August, 1998. In appeal, following substantial questions of law have been suggested : 'I. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal (ITAT) was legally correct in dismissing the Department's appeal by not accepting the time period allowed under Section 153(3) Expln. 1(iii) r/w Section 158BH of the IT Act, and not deciding the appeal on merits? II Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal was justified in holding that there is violation of mandatory rules inasmuch as there was no approval of the CIT for getting the books of account audited under Section 142(2A) of the Act, therefore, the same was invalid, despite the fact that the reference was made absolutely in conformity with the provisions of Section 142(2A) of the Act? III. Whether the learned Tribunal was justified in holding that CIT has no power under the Act to extend the time and AO is only competent to extend time upon application of the assessee by virtue of proviso to Section 142(2C) of the IT Act?'
(3.) WITH regard to substantial question of law raised in this appeal about the expiry of limitation for completing the assessment for the block period in terms of Section 158BE, the Tribunal found the assessment of block period 1988 -89 framed on 8th March, 2001 to be barred by time in view of the existing provisions as on the date the assessment was made.;