9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 1322X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h a situation, the retraction of the assessee cannot be said to be invalid in absence of any incriminating documents. In view of these facts, we uphold the order of the CIT(A) stating no addition can be made merely on the basis of surrender without existence of any corroborative evidence found against the assesee - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No: 1573/Del/2012 - - - Dated:- 14-10-2015 - SHRI J.SUDHAKAR REDDY ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER For The Appellant : Shri Kartar Singh, ACIT DR For The Respondent : Shri Vinod Kumar Bindal, CA ORDER PER SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA JUDICIAL MEMBER This Department s appeal is filed against the order dated 5.1.2012 passed by the Ld. CIT(App ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e appellant who drew salary from the partnership firm. The Ld. CIT(A), in conclusion, stated that the addition of ₹ 2 crores could not be sustained because no incriminating material justifying such an addition had been found during the search and further the assessee had retracted the statement within a period of 6 days, therefore if the investment wing had any grievance, it could have carried out further investigation in this regard. 2. In the appeal before us the Ld. DR strongly relied on the assessment order and also placed reliance on the decision of Hon ble Supreme Court in a SLP (C) No. 14028 in the case of Surjeet Singh Chhabra vs. Union of India and others . He pleaded that revenue officials are not police officers and the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .2006 and retracted on 28.11.2006. We also find that some papers and documents were seized. However the issue has not been dealt in the assessment order. This shows that the addition was not based on any calculation of undisclosed income on the basis of seized papers and documents. 5. The CBDT has issued instructions with regard to the confession of additional income during the course of search and seizure and survey operations. Instruction No. F. No. 286/2/2003-IT(Inv .II) dated 10.3.2003 discusses additions without any credible evidence during the course of search and seizure which is quoted as under: Instances have come to the notice of the Board where assesses have claimed that they have been forced to confess the undisclosed in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the basis of admission, the assessee could not have been subjected to additions, unless and until some corroborative evidence was found in support of such admission. Further statement recorded at such odd hours (at midnight) could not be considered to be voluntary statement, it was subsequently retracted and necessary evidence was led contrary to such admission. Addition was deleted. Arun Kumar Bhansali vs DCIT (2006)10 SOT 46 (Bang) (URO): Block period 1990-91 to 1999-2000 - Whether while computing undisclosed income of assessee, Assessing Officer should take cognizance of such correct income as depicted in books of account as well as in seized material,' and should not adopt a figure merely as per admission of assessee - H ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
