9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (4) TMI 475X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated 04.02.2017 u/s 131 of the Act were recorded unauthorized and illegally by the person who was not authorized in law to administer oath. Consequently, there is no evidentiary value of such illegally recorded statement being without authority of law, hence the implication or inference flowing from such statements may be directed to be completely ignored. 3. Rs. 51,14,243/-: The Ld. CIT(A) erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in confirming the addition made by the Ld. AO on account of alleged suppressed school fees, completely ignoring the consistently followed method of accounting, and other material available on record. The addition so made and confirmed being contrary to provision of law and facts the same may kindly deleted in full. 4.1 The Ld. CIT (A) further erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in confirming the denial of the benefit of exemption of income u/s. 11 & 12 of the Act despite the appellant trust already enjoying the registration under S. 12AA. Hence, the benefit so denied and confirmed by the CIT(A) being contrary to the provision of law and facts, the authorities below may be directed to allow the benefit of exemption income, as cla ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... authorities below may be directed to allow the benefit of exemption income, as claimed. 4.2 Alternatively, and without prejudice to above, if the addition of the suppressed school fees of Rs. 36,43,740/- is upheld, the same may kindly be declared as entitled to the exemption u/s. 11 & 12 of the Act and thus, assessing the total income at nil. 5. Rs. 8,40,589/-: The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law as well as in facts in confirming the charging interest made by the AO u/s. 234B of the Act. The appellant totally denies it liability of charging of any such interest. The interest, so charged, being contrary to the provisions of law and facts, kindly be deleted in full. 6. the appellant prays your honor to add, amend or alter any of the grounds of the appeal on or before the date of hearing. In ITA No. 315/JP/2024 (2017-18), the assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. The survey u/s. 133A carried out on the office premises of M/s. Quick Advertisement Co., 149, Ballabhbari, Kota on 02.02.2017 is illegal, void ab initio being without jurisdiction and therefore any inference or implications flowing from such an illegal survey, deserves to be ignored or be not given ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... recorded u/s 133A(3)(iii) and therefore such survey statement has no evidentiary value at all. Therefore the reliance placed by the AO and supported by CIT(A) for making/confirming the additions (on this legal aspect that statement were recorded u/s 131 on oath has evidentiary value hence can be used against the assessee), is a complete misinterpretation of law and misreading of the facts on record and hence, the stand of Revenue deserves to be rejected and moreover the implications flowing from such statements may be directed to be completely ignored." B. The following additional grounds of appeal are being raised, as under: "7. The impugned notice u/s 148 dt. 15.03.2019 is void ab initio and a nullity, having been issued completely without jurisdiction u/s 147, instead of issuing the notice u/s 153C. Consequently, the impugned assessment proceedings having being initiated in consequence to certain material seized during search & seizure proceedings in the case of Allen Group Kota, the assessment proceedings were to carried out u/s 153C only, being a third party case. Hence, the impugned notice u/s 148 dated 15.03.2019 and the consequent impugned assessment order deserves to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erred in alleging / taking stand that statement of the assessee recorded during survey on 04.02.2017 were recorded u/s 131, against the correct factual and legal position that the statements were recorded u/s 133A(3)(iii) and therefore such survey statement has no evidentiary value at all. Therefore the reliance placed by the AO and supported by CIT(A) for making/confirming the additions (on this legal aspect that statement were recorded u/s 131 on oath has evidentiary value hence can be used against the assessee), is a complete misinterpretation of law and misreading of the facts on record and hence, the stand of Revenue deserves to be rejected and moreover the implications flowing from such statements may be directed to be completely ignored." B. The following additional grounds of appeal are being raised, as under: "7. The impugned notice u/s 143(2) dt. 13.11.2019 is void ab initio and a nullity, having been issued completely without jurisdiction, instead of issuing the notice u/s 153C. Consequently, the impugned assessment proceedings having being initiated in consequence to certain material seized during search & seizure proceedings in the case of Allen Group Kota, the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he statements recorded vide dated:04.02.2017 u/s. 131 of the Act were unauthorized and illegal. Consequently, there is no evidentiary value of such illegally recorded statement being without authority of Law, hence the implication or inference flowing from statements may be directed to be completely ignored." We have considered the ground taken by the assessee in the light of provisions of section 131 of the Act and judicial pronouncements of various coordinate benches and Hon'ble High Courts and Apex Court. 4. It is found that the similar issue on the validity of statements recorded u/s. 131 of the Act during the survey proceedings u/s. 133A of the Act by the coordinate bench, Jaipur in the case of M/s. Nikhaar Fashions ITA No. 1020/JPR/2024, wherein Accountant Member was author and observed as under: "16. Moreover, as far as the authenticity of the statement recorded during the survey proceedings are concerned, Section 133A does not empower the authorities to record the statements. This is a settle position of law that the statement obtained under section133A would not automatically bind upon the assessee. However, an admission is extremely an important piece of evidence but i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rvey matter, this bench is relying on the documents being seized in the light of section 292C of the Act and no importance is being given to the statements recorded u/s. 131 of the Act. For sake of ready reference provisions of section 292C of the Act are reproduced herein below as under: "Section - 292C, Income-tax Act, 1961 - FA, 2024 Presumption as to assets, books of account, etc. 292C. (1) Where any books of account, other documents, money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing are or is found in the possession or control of any person in the course of a search under section 132or survey under section 133A, it may, in any proceeding under this Act, be presumed- (i) that such books of account, other documents, money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing belong or belongs to such person; (ii) that the contents of such books of account and other documents are true; and (iii) that the signature and every other part of such books of account and other documents which purport to be in the handwriting of any particular person or which may reasonably be assumed to have been signed by, or to be in the handwriting of, any particular person, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... only qua the person who is searched and/or from whose possession the books of account and documents are found and none else. Moreover, this presumption is rebuttable. In the given facts of the case, since the documents in question was not found or impounded from the appellant's premises but in the course of survey (not search) conducted against a third party, the presumption set out in Section 292C of the Act does not apply to the appellant. 10. It may also be mentioned that as per well-established law as explained by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Smt. Tarulata Shyam v. CIT 1977 CTR (SC) 275: [1977] 108 ITR 345 (SC), there is no scope for importing into the statute words which are not there. The intention of the legislature is primarily to be gathered from the words used in the statute. Once the assessee comes within the letter of law he must be taxed. In the case of L.P. Cardoza v. Agrl. ITO [1998] 144 CTR (Kar) 474: [1997] 227 ITR 421 (Kar), it has been held by Hon'ble Karnataka High Court that while interpreting a provision in a tax law wherein a legal fiction is created, such provision will have to be strictly interpreted. In the case of Orissa State Wareho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
