Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram
Income Tax - Highlights / Catch Notes

Home Highlights January 2025 Year 2025 This

The ITAT held that a statement/document received from a third ...


Third-party statements require cross-examination for tax additions, says ITAT; unsupported disclosures insufficient.

January 6, 2025

Case Laws     Income Tax     AT

The ITAT held that a statement/document received from a third party cannot be relied upon for making an addition u/s 69A, without giving the assessee an opportunity to contradict the same and cross-examine the person who gave the statement/document. The suo-moto disclosure made by the assessee before the Settlement Commission, without corroborative material/evidence, cannot be the basis for making an addition. In the present case, except for a letter filed before the DCIT/Settlement Commission, there was no other corroborative material/evidence for sustaining the addition. Moreover, no opportunity was given to the assessee to cross-examine the person who made the disclosure/issued the letter relied upon for the addition. Consequently, the addition was held unsustainable and deleted in favor of the assessee.

View Source

 


 

You may also like:

  1. Validity of reassessment order u/s 147 - Denial of Cross-Examination Opportunity - Reliance of statement of third party - The High Court noted that the petitioner did...

  2. ITAT allowed Revenue's appeal, setting aside CIT(A)'s order that had deleted additions made by AO under s.153A. The Tribunal clarified that for assessment years abated...

  3. Addition made u/s 69C of the Income Tax Act for alleged cash payments based on a WhatsApp message and statement of a third party. The key points are: The WhatsApp...

  4. Addition u/s 68 - receipt of share application money - reliance on statement of third parties - The statements of third parties i.e. two angadias relied upon by the ld....

  5. The case pertains to the allegation of clandestine manufacture and clearance of structural items/rolled products by the appellant. The revenue's case rested solely on...

  6. The Appellate Tribunal considered the legality of additions based on a diary seized from a third party. The Tribunal held that the presumption u/s 132(4A) of the Act...

  7. Violation of principles of natural justice - opportunity for cross-examination. Evidentiary value of statements recorded u/s 14 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 cannot be...

  8. Violation of principles of natural justice - denial of cross-examination - revocation of customs broker license, forfeiture of security deposit, and penalty imposed by...

  9. HC quashed the authority's refusal to allow cross-examination of witnesses whose statements were used in show cause notice under CGST Act. The court emphasized that when...

  10. Assessment u/s 153A - beneficiary of bogus LTCG - Addition u/s 68 - onus to prove - The whole basis of making additions is third-party statement and no opportunity of...

  11. Bogus LTCG - Addition u/s 68 - onus to prove genuineness of the transactions - The whole basis of making additions is third-party statement and no opportunity of...

  12. The summary focuses on the rejection of cross-examination of DRI officers and a co-noticee by the competent authority. The main objective of cross-examination is to...

  13. Assessee's addition of on-money paid in cash to developer for property purchase, source unexplained, was based on data from third party's search and third party's...

  14. Clandestine Removal - threshold limit of SSI Exemption - third party evidences reliable or not - It is settled that statements of dealers and transporters and the...

  15. Bogus LTCG - exemption u/s 10(38) on sale of shares denied - During the appellate proceedings, the assessee was not made available any such statement and even the right...

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates