9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (4) TMI 481X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es on 22.07.2015. During the course of search, certain information/documents belonging to the assessee were also found. Accordingly, notice u/s 142(1) was issued on 30.03.2017 for furnishing the return of Income on or before 01.05.2017. The assessee filed return of income on 14.08.2017 declaring total income of Rs. 11,06,220/-. 3. The assessee has declared taxable income of Rs. 11,06,220/- for the assessment under consideration. The assessee has shown Business income and income from other sources. The assessee has also shown exempt profit from M/s. Golden Manor of Rs. 58,40,480/-, in his Capital Account where the assessee is a partner having 20% of share. 4. During the course of search operation, the assessee has surrendered Rs. 50,00,000 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... allenged by the Department and are taken to have been accepted. The purported sur render was induced by tiring out the assessee by dragging the search operations to the wee hours of the day after the date of their commencement making it clear to them that the search parties will not leave till the object of 'surrender ' is achieved. The assessee realizing it signed the statements at relevant places recording words put in their mouth by the interrogators and surrendered a total amount of Rs. 1 crore of which Rs. 20 lakhs was surrendered on behalf of his son Mr. Yogesh Singla, Rs. 30 lakhs on behalf of his wife Mrs. Madhu Singla and balance Rs. 50 lakhs was sur rendered by the assessee himself. The amount surrendered had no logical ex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nsulting each of the family members. The AO held that this itself proves that the search team had not adopted any oppressive and coercive practices during the search operation. The search team allowed the assessee and his family members to consult each other before making the surrender. As such, the contention of the assessee that the surrender was made under pressure, cannot be accepted and is not a bonafide on his part. 8. The AO held that in answer to Question No. 56 of his statement the assessee said that he is surrendering additional income of Rs. 50 Lacs in his hands. The assessee had tendered three cheques No. 004850, 004851 and 004852 of Rs. 5 lacs each in lieu of payment of tax on income surrendered. Since, the assessee had presen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he following judicial pronouncements: * Greenview restaurant vs. AC IT 263 ITR 169 Guwahati High Court * Bhagirath Agarwal vs. CTT Delhi High Court 215 taxman 229 * Suresh Kumar vs. DCIT-SC(2014) 11. Wherein the Hon'ble Courts has held that an addition in assessee's income relying upon statement recorded during search operation cannot be deleted without proving statements to be incorrect. 12. It was held that neither, any of the witnesses came out with the any comment or objection in this regard, either during the course of search or at later stage. Since the statement given by appellant is statement on oath, therefore, it has evidentiary value for the statute. Any statement or disclosure given therein, cannot be withdrawn o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
