TMI Blog2010 (4) TMI 1058X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the purpose of taxing the amount in the hands of the assessee, despite specific request being made by the assessee for cross-examining both the said persons, the AO has not permitted the assessee to cross-examine them. In the circumstances, no reliance could be placed upon the statements of the said persons as the respondent assessee had no opportunity to cross-examine them. The statements made by the aforesaid persons would have no evidentiary value and as such, would not be admissible in evidence. Further, though the said Shri Manoj Vadodaria has stated that he has paid ₹ 60 lakhs to the assessee on behalf of one Shri G.C. Patel, the said amount has not been taxed in the hands of Shri G.C. Patel. Moreover, no evidence has been ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ure operations came to be carried out at the residence of the respondent assessee and as well as at the residence of Shri Suresh A. Patel, land broker at Ahmedabad. During the course of search, at the residence as well as office of Shri Suresh A. Patel, certain incriminating documents were found containing details of transactions of land entered into with land owners and builders. With reference to noting recorded at p. 105 of the file Annex. A-1 seized from his office, Shri Suresh A. Patel in his statement revealed that transactions were pertaining to one Shri Manoj Vadodaria and that the account was written as per the instructions of Shri Manoj Vadodaria and ₹ 60 lakhs was paid on behalf of one Shri G.C. Patel. Shri Manoj Vadodaria ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ne through the order passed by the AO. We have also gone through the order passed by the AO dt. 28th Sept., 1998 in the case of Shri G.C. Patel under s. 158BC r/w s. 158BD r/w s. 113. In the said order the AO has discussed the issue of Thaltej Char Rasta land in paras 13 to 13.5 of the assessment order and has made an addition of ₹ 42.60 lacs in the asst. yr. 1995-96. In the said order there is no mention of any payment of ₹ 60 lacs allegedly made by Shri G.C. Patel to the assessee through Shri Manoj Vadodaria. The AO in the case of Shri G.C. Patel has given English transaction of the land at Thaltej Char Rasta at p. 9 of Annex. A which forms a part of the assessment order which is as under : Land deal Thalte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oever was paid by Shri G.C. Patel to the assessee Shri Mahendra Mukhi. The AO in the case of Shri G.C. Patel has also enclosed the copy of statement of Shri Manoj Vadodaria, dt. 14 Nov., 1995 recorded by ADI as Annex. 2 on which reliance has been placed by the AO for making the addition in the case of the assessee before us. In that statement in para 4 it is stated that in respect of Thaltej Char Rasta, survey No. 274, Shri Manoj Vadodaria worked as a working broker along with Shri Suresh A. Patel. In para 4 it is stated that according to his knowledge this land was purchased from Shri Mahendra Mukhi and sold to Shri G.C. Patel and his job related only to the clearance whereas the dealing of sale and purchase between the seller and the purc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the seized record of a third party. The above view has since been approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Jain Diaries. In the case before us however even there is no entry relating to the payment of ₹ 60 lacs allegedly made by Shri Manoj Vadodadria on behalf of Shri G.C. Patel to the assessee but only a bald statement not supported by any evidence. On the other hand the assessee categorically denies his involvement in any deal relating to Thaltej Char Rasta land. The seized paper found from the residence/office of Shri Suresh A. Patel does not contain the name of the assessee at all as is evident from the copy of the paper attached with the assessment order of Shri G.C. Patel which has been extracted by us above. I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Tribunal has rightly found that the basis for making the addition in the case of the assessee is merely a bald statement of Shri Manoj Vadodaria, which is not corroborated with any documentary evidence found at the time of search, either in the case of Shri Suresh A. Patel or Shri Manoj Vadodaria or the assessee. No plea to the effect that the impugned order of the Tribunal suffers from any perversity has been raised. 7. In the aforesaid circumstances, the Tribunal having based its conclusion on findings of fact recorded by it after appreciation of the evidence on record, it cannot be stated that the impugned order of the Tribunal suffers from any legal infirmity while holding that there was no justification for making the disputed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
