9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 948X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r And Shri S. S. Godara, Judicial Member Revenue by : Shri O.P. Chaudhary, Sr. D.R. Assessee by : Shri K.K. Shah, A.R. ORDER Per S. S. Godara, Judicial Member This Revenue s appeal for A.Y. 2008-09, arises from order of the CIT(A)-IV, Surat dated 28-03-2011 in appeal no. CASIV/ 190/10-11, deleting unaccounted income addition of ₹ 1,59,17,275/- made by the Assessing Officer in assessment order dated 21-12-2010 as based on assessee s partners statements made during survey, in proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short the Act . 2. The assessee-firm is in building and construction business. The department carried out a survey in its case on 30-01-2008 at its site/premises. It recorde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cause the partner of the firm had disclosed ₹ 2,35,27,525/- in his statement during the survey proceedings. The appellant not only retracted the statement (in part) regarding disclosure of income in the survey proceedings but also explained why the retraction was justified. During the survey proceedings, an estimate of expenditure towards development and construction of the project was made at ₹ 4.20 crores and disclosure of ₹ 2,35,27,525/- was worked out taking into account the construction expenses incurred till the date of survey during financial year 2007-08 (A.Y. 2008-09) only. While making the retraction of income it was explained that the expenses towards development and construction in the financial year 2006-07 (A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in absence of witnesses. In other judgments, it is held that statements have evidentiary value but is not conclusive evidence and in the event of retraction of any admission, the statement can be used only if corroborated by other evidences. No cogent evidence has been shown to exist which would establish the existence of unexplained investment by the appellant other than the retracted statement. No incriminating documents showing evidence of unexplained investment or receipt of on money on sale of bungalows has been unearthed during survey. Even after retraction of statement (in part), the A.O. did not make any attempt during the assessment proceedings to collect evidence of unexplained investment of the appellant so as to counter the rea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rtners statements recorded during survey. Learned authorized representative takes us to the lower appellate findings extracted hereinabove holding that not a single incriminating document or evidence or loose sheet has been found. We put a specific query to the learned departmental representative to place on record any evidence or material other than statements of assessee s partners supportive of the impugned addition. He replied in negative. We are of the opinion in these peculiar facts and circumstances that the impugned addition based on mere survey statement is not sustainable. A catena of case law as discussed hereinabove supports the same view. The Revenue fails to point out any distinction on facts or law therein. We affirms CIT(A) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
