9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (8) TMI 177X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... record statement of any person which may be useful for or relevant in connection with ongoing survey proceedings. This provision however does not specify as to whether such statement is to be recorded on oath or otherwise, because a Statement recorded on oath carries evidential value and automatically binds the assessee unlike the statement recorded otherwise than on oath. In the instant case, admittedly the partner of the assessee firm in a statement recorded u/s 133A has admitted the impugned sum as an additional income of his firm towards probable errors omissions which was unknown to both the rival parties at the time of survey. The said disclosure/admission was simply made under the pretext that the Revenue may at any time thereafter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... see : Mr V V Kawdia [ Ld. AR ] For the Revenue : Mr Umashankar Prasad [ Ld. DR ] ORDER PER G. D. PADMAHSHALI, AM; Against DIN Order No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2023-24/1063185555(1) dt. 22/03/2024 passed u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [ the Act hereinafter] passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal-11 Pune [ CIT(A) hereinafter] which in turn arisen out of order of assessment passed u/s 143(3) of the Act by the Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Jalgaon [ AO hereinafter] anent to assessment year 2014-15 [ AY hereinafter] the assessee is in appeal. 2. Tersely stated the facts of the case are that; 2.1 The assessee is a partnership firm and engaged in retail trading business of readymade garments. During the year under consideration a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... O [DCIT, Circle-2, Jalgaon] solely on the basis of statement recorded during the course of survey action and without bringing on record any corroborative evidence in support of the same. 3. Heard rival parties and subject to rule 18 of ITAT-Rules 1963 perused material placed on record and considered the fact circumstances of the case in the light of settled legal position and case laws relied upon. The sole substantive issue in the present appeal revolves around the permissibility of addition on the basis of statement recorded in the course of survey action u/s 133A of the Act where no corroborative evidences/findings were brought on record by the Revenue. 4. There is no definition in the Act as to what constitutes a 'statement'. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... admitted the impugned sum as an additional income of ₹8,00,000/- of his firm towards probable errors omissions which was unknown to both the rival parties at the time of survey. The said disclosure/admission was simply made under the pretext that the Revenue may at any time thereafter would discover the same and probably tax it as non-business income of the assessee. However, in the ITR filed the assessee offered all the additional income admitted by it in the statement recorded u/s 133A of the Act but the impugned sum, for the reasons that both the parties could neither discover any error or omission nor there was any in the records, books documents etc., came to surface. Insofar as the retraction of statement is concerned, unlike a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
