9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (5) TMI 325X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rial placed before us and the precedents relied upon. The assessee is a doctor by profession. She was running scan centres in different parts of Chennai along with her husband Dr. B.I. Jaffrey. On 6th March, 2002 a survey was conducted under s. 133A of the Act. The assessee agreed to offer additional income of Rs. 9 lakhs. The offer was made in response to the observations made by the Addl. Director of IT during the course of survey that the assessee did not maintain regular books of accounts as required under s. 44AA of the Act and had understated the professional receipts. 4. On 3rd Oct., 2002 the assessee filed a return admitting a taxable income of Rs. 6,19,856. Additional income of Rs. 9 lakhs as agreed to at the time of survey was n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s voluntarily at the time of survey operation. It is also a fact that the assessee did not maintain books as per the requirements of s. 44AA of the Act. It is pertinent to note that the survey took place on 6th March, 2002, i.e., at the fag end of the accounting year. Accounts as required to be maintained under the prescription of s. 44AA were not found. The assessee disclosed the income and is said to have paid advance tax also in conformity with the said disclosure. Thereafter in the return of income the agreed sum was not reflected. There was no retraction. In the return there was no indication as to why the agreed amount of income was not offered. From all these the AO concluded that the income to the extent that was disclosed at the ti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e ground of jurisdiction only. The learned counsel for the assessee invited our attention on the decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court rendered in the case of CIT vs. S. Khader Khan Son (2008) 214 CTR (Mad) 589. In this case the Hon'ble High Court has held that s. 133A does not empower any AO to examine any person on oath, hence any such statement has no evidentiary value and any admission made during such statement cannot, by itself, be made the basis for addition. Since the issue on merits was not decided by the CIT(A), we in the interests of justice, set aside the impugned order on this count and restore it to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to decide this issue in accordance with law after providing adequate opportunity to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
