TMI Blog2005 (11) TMI 485X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ini, Judicial Member . - This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of the CIT(A), Ludhiana dated 17-9-2004 for the block period from 1-4-1990 to 16-1-2001 on the following grounds :- (1)The ld. CIT(A) has erred both in law and on facts of the case in directing the Assessing Officer to allow the assessee s claim of loss of later years against the undisclosed income of ₹ 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the addition and allowed the claim of the assessee for set off of the losses against the undisclosed income. Similarly, the Assessing Officer charged surcharge under section 113 of the Income-tax Act. The CIT(A) deleted the charging of surcharge by following various decisions of the different Benches of the ITAT and was of the view that the proviso to section 113 was inserted in the Income-tax A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ks, Jalandhar, etc. vide order dated 17-1-2005 held that the levy of the surcharge was provided in the proviso to section 113 of the Income-tax Act, however, amendment has been made applicable prospectively with effect from 1-6-2002 and is not applicable to the searches carried out under section 132A prior to 1-6-2002. 6. In this view of the matter, we do not find any merit in the appeal of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
