( 1 ) THIS is an appeal under Section 260-A of the income-tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act ). Challenge in the appeal is to the conclusions of the Income-tax appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (in short tribunal ) arrived at in ITA (SS) No. 70/del/96 holding that provisions relating to block assessment, in terms of section 158ba are not applicable to the facts of the case.

( 2 ) FACTUAL scenario so far as relevant is as follows:

SEARCH and sseisure operation were conducted on a business group known as Kohl. I Group on 1/11/1996. As it was noticed that assessee was having close links with the said groups a search under section 132 of the Act was also conducted at the residential premises of the assessee on 30/11/1996. Assessee was found to be engaged in the business of property dealing, as his main source of income, was found to be commission earned for making arrangements for hiring out or letting out properties and from purchase and sale of immovable properties. Assessing officer issued notice under Section 158bc of the Act on 10/6/1997 calling upon the assessee to file return for the block period ending on 30/11/1996. Assessee filed return stating that there was no undisclosed income for the block period. Assessing officer issued a detailed questionnaire based on the materials which were found during the search and were seized. Assessee filed his reply. During the block assessment proceedings. Assessing Officer was of the view that the seized materials and the books of account were of complex nature. Therefore, after getting approval from the Commissioner of Income-tax Delhi-11, new Delhi (in short commissioner ), Assessing Officer appointed a firm of Chartered Accountants as special auditors in terms of the order under Section. 142 (2a ) of the Act. Special audit was completed and report was submitted on 14/5/1998. Assessee was given opportunity to have his say as to why addition should not be made on the basis of views relating to issues referred to by the special auditors as well as on the seized material. Assessee submitted his reply and took the stand that there was no scope for making any addition. Assessing Officer was of the view that the income was to be taxed as business income and not as capital gains as claimed by assessee. Accordingly, block assessment was made. Matter was challenged in appeal before the Tribunal. On consideration of the factual background. Tribunal came to hold that the case was in the nature of mere change of opinion and is not relatable to any seized material. Such conclusion is the subject-matter of challenge in the appeal.

( 3 ) WE have heard learned counsel for parties. In this appeal, it has been stated that tribunal was not justified in deleting the additions made by the Assessing Officer as un-disclosed income on the ground that additions could not be termed as un-disclosed income within the meaning of Clause (b) of section 158-B of the Act. . Learned counsel for Revenue with reference, to the order passed by the Assessing officer submitted that special auditor was appointed to indicate its views vis-a-vis the seized material and, therefore, it cannot be said that the income as determined was not on the basis of any seized material but on the basis of change of opinion. Learned counsel for the assessee, on the other hand, submitted that assessing Officer proceeded on the basis that the only question which needs to. be decided was whether in the block assessment period an income which was hitherto being returned under a particular section of the Act could be brought to tax under different heads of income as contemplated in the Act.

( 4 ) SECTION 158-B is a part of Chapter XIV-B dealing with special procedure for assessment of search cases. The Chapter contains Section 158b to Section bh. "block period and "un-disclosed income have been defined in clauses (a) and (b) to Section 158-B, for the purpose of the Chapter, we are concerned with the definition of "un-disclosed income