The Assessing Officer had made an addition on account of unexplained income on the ground that plant and machinery shown in the balance sheet on 31-3-2004 was to the tune of Rs. 21.58 lakhs whereas the same was shown as Rs. 34.87 lakhs as on 1-4-2004. Additionally, he made an addition of Rs. 6.99 lakhs on account of plant and machinery added  as income from undisclosed source. CIT(A) and Tribunal affirmed the order of the AO. On appeal the  assessee contended that   the assessment order was framed in violation of the CBDT guidelines. Court held that BDT promulgated procedure for selection of returns/cases of non-corporate assessees for scrutiny during the financial year 2006-07. From a bare reading of paragraph No.2 of the procedure laid down by the CBDT for selection of returns/cases for the financial year 2006-07, it is evident that paragraph 2 only casts an obligation on the Assessing Officer to compulsorily scrutinize the cases covered by Clauses (a) to (s) of paragraph No.2. The CBDT circular laying down procedure aforesaid does not and cannot take away the power and jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer conferred upon it under section 143(2). The first appellate authority and the second appellate forum have rightly concurred with the view of the Assessing Officer and upheld the additions made on account of fixed assets.  No question of law arises. (AY. 2005-06)