2014 (11) TMI 57 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT

Additions on the basis of statement - Whether the statement can be treated as the one, under sub-section (4) of Section 132 of the Act - Held that:- The search was conducted in the premises of the assessee on 09.01.1996 - nothing incriminating was found or recovered during the search - It was only two and half months thereafter i.e., on 20.03.1996, that a statement was recorded - the statement was not recorded during the course of search or seizure - Such a statement cannot at all, be brought under the fold of Section 132 (4) of the Act - nothing was recovered during the search - hence, there was no occasion or basis to record the statement, even if it is done when the search was in progress - there is a basic infirmity in the very foundation of the case, upon which the revenue sought to rest their block assessment - the question of a statement of that nature being treated as the clinching evidence, by itself, leading to any penal action does not arise.

As decided in Commissioner Of Income-Tax Versus Shri Ramdas Motor Transport [1998 (8) TMI 51 - ANDHRA PRADESH High Court] - the question of examining any person by the authorised officer arises only when he found such person to be in possession of any undisclosed money or books of account - when the managing director or any other persons were found to be not in possession of any incriminating material, the question of examining them by the authorised officer during the course of search and recording any statement from them by invoking the powers u/s 132(4) does not arise - This provision embedded in sub-section (4) is obviously based on the well established rule of evidence that mere confessional statement without there being any documentary proof shall not be used in evidence against the person who made such statement – thus, the order of the Tribunal is upheld – Decided against revenue.