2017 (3) TMI 1829 - HC - Income Tax

Addition on account of retraction from income admitted as undisclosed and not recorded in the books of accounts in the statement of the Director of the assessee company recorded on oath - Survey operations u/s 133A - ITAT upholding the decision of CIT(A) of deleting the addition - HELD THAT - The appellant and the other sister concerns are independent and merely on 133A statement the addition could not have been made. Therefore the CIT (A) as well as the Tribunal have not committed any error in deleting the addition.- Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Challenge to Tribunal's order dismissing department's appeal.
2. Substantial question of law regarding addition of undisclosed income.
3. Consideration of facts by CIT(A) in relation to the case.
4. Justification of deletion of addition by CIT(A) and Tribunal.

Analysis:
1. The appellant challenged the Tribunal's decision dismissing the department's appeal. The substantial question of law raised was whether the Tribunal was justified in upholding the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition of Rs. 80,00,000 made by the Assessing Officer (AO) due to retraction from income admitted as undisclosed. The CIT(A) considered the case of the assessee and observed various facts.

2. The CIT(A) noted that during survey operations under section 133A of the Income Tax Act, a director of the appellant company stated that certain transactions had resulted in a net profit of Rs. 80,00,000, which was not reflected in the regular books of accounts. The surrender made during the survey was the basis for the AO's addition. However, apart from the statements, there was no evidence to substantiate this surrender. The CIT(A) also found that the other company involved was independent, and its transactions were conducted through its own bank accounts.

3. The CIT(A) further observed that the books of accounts of the other company were verified and found to be verifiable, with the income reflected in its return of income. The CIT(A) and the Tribunal concluded that the appellant and the other companies were independent entities, and the addition based solely on the 133A statement was not justified. Therefore, the CIT(A) and the Tribunal did not err in deleting the addition of Rs. 80,00,000.

4. In conclusion, the High Court upheld the decision of the CIT(A) and the Tribunal, dismissing the appeal. The judgment emphasized the importance of considering all relevant facts and evidence before making additions to income based on statements obtained during surveys. The independence of entities involved and the verifiability of transactions were crucial factors in the decision to delete the addition.