9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (12) TMI 1049 - AT - Income TaxIncome declared on account of survey operation Held that - The Department failed to collect any material during the course of survey and the Assessing Officer is simply harping upon the statement of the assessee - Following the case of CIT v. S. Khader Khan Son 2013 (6) TMI 305 - SUPREME COURT Solely on the basis of statement of ther assessee addition cannot be made Decided in favour of assessee.
Issues:
1. Addition of Rs. 2,00,00,000 as undisclosed income declared during a survey operation. 2. Disallowance of Rs. 5,52,595 under section 40(a)(ia). 3. Legality of the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). Issue 1: Addition of Rs. 2,00,00,000 as undisclosed income: The assessee declared Rs. 2 crores as additional income during a survey under section 133A. The Assessing Officer added this amount to the taxable income as the assessee did not file a revised return. The assessee argued that the statement made during the survey was not on oath and lacked evidentiary value. The Department failed to provide any incriminating material found during the survey to support the addition. The Tribunal noted that the statement recorded during a survey under section 133A does not carry evidentiary value and cannot be the sole basis for making additions. Citing relevant case laws, the Tribunal held that without concrete evidence, the addition of Rs. 2 crores was unjustified and deleted it. Issue 2: Disallowance under section 40(a)(ia): The disallowance of Rs. 5,52,595 under section 40(a)(ia) was confirmed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). However, no arguments were presented by the assessee challenging this disallowance. Consequently, this ground was rejected, and the disallowance upheld. Issue 3: Legality of the Commissioner's order: The legality of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) order was questioned by the assessee. However, no specific arguments were advanced on this issue during the proceedings. As a result, this ground was rejected without further discussion. In conclusion, the Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeal partly by deleting the addition of Rs. 2 crores as undisclosed income based on a statement made during a survey operation. The disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) was upheld as no arguments were presented to challenge it. The Tribunal's decision was pronounced on March 8, 2013.
|
