B.M. Kothari, A.M. - This appeal by the assessee is directed against the assessment made under section 158BC read with section 158BD of the IT Act, 1961, (‘the Act’) for the block assessment period 1st April, 1985 to 10th Oct., 1995.

The assessee has raised the following grounds in this appeal :

1. On the facts and circumstances prevailing in the case and as per provision of law, it be held that invoking provisions of section 158BD is bad in law. It further be held that the case of the appellant is not covered by provisions of Chapter XIV-B of the Act. The order passed by the Assessing Officer in terms of provisions of section 158BC read with section 158BD is without jurisdiction and is vitiated. The order passed by the Assessing Officer be declared as null and void and not tenable in law.

2. Without prejudice to ground No. 1 and assuming without admitting that the case of the appellant is covered by mischief of provisions of Chapter XIV-B and Assessing Officer is within his right to proceed with the assessment in terms of provisions of the said. Chapter, on facts and circumstances of the case and as per provisions of law, it be held that the Assessing Officer erred in considering amount of Rs. 27,50,000 as investment alleged to have been done on account of finance for arranging bogus NRE gifts and holding the same as forming part of the income covered by Chapter XIV-B of the Act in making additions of Rs. 82,500 on account of commission at 3 per cent alleged to have been earned on alleged investment of Rs. 27,50,000 and holding the same as forming part of the undisclosed income, in making addition of Rs. 1,60,000 as undisclosed income on account of amount alleged to be received from Mr. Rajendra D. Mehta till 30th, in making addition of Rs. 4 lacs on account of amount alleged to be received from Rajendra D. Mehta by 15th April, 1994, in making addition of Rs. 4 lacs holding the same as forming part of the income being gifts alleged to have been not genuine in making addition of Rs. 2,52,750 by holding the investment as unexplained stated to have been done in construction of house property, in making further addition of Rs. 18,73,925 holding the same as forming part of the income on account of alleged undisclosed investment in foreign exchange, in making further addition of Rs. 4 lacs holding the same as part of income on account of alleged commission earned for arranging bogus NRE gifts and in making further addition of Rs. 9 lacs holding the same as forming part of the income on account of alleged commission earned for arranging bogus NRE gifts. On facts and circumstances prevailing in the case and as per provisions of law, it be held that no part of amount of Rs. 70,18,175 computed as undisclosed income is assessable in the hands of the appellant. It further be held that there is no undisclosed income in terms of provisions of Chapter XIV-B assessable for the block period in the hands of the appellant. The amount of Rs. 70,18,175 assessed by the Assessing Officer for the block period in terms of provisions of section 158 read with section 158BC read with section 158BD be deleted. The appellant be granted just and proper relief in respect of all such additions.

3. On facts and circumstances prevailing in the case and as per provisions of law, it be held that the Assessing Officer proceeded for resuming the jurisdiction in terms of Chapter XIV-B on wrong premises and purely on the basis of assumption and surmises and on irrelevant factors. It further be held that assumptions made by the Assessing Officer in respect of FERA matters and in respect of Chit No. 8 holding the same as forming part of the document is erroneous and without any supporting basis. It further be held that Chit No. 8 does not from part of any document. It further be held that the Assessing Officer misdirected himself in holding that the said chit is in the handwriting of the appellant ignoring the fact that appellant has denied the same and in support t