9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (5) TMI 1043X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gainst the order of Ld. CIT(A) dated 11-12-.2012 passed for assessment year 2009-10. 2. The solitary substantial grievance of the revenue is that the ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 23 lakhs made by the AO with the aid of section 69 of the I.T Act 1961. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in the business of running a petrol pump and rice trading. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ooks of accounts which are duly audited by an auditor u/s. 44AB of the Act and the entries therein are duly supported by evidence. The AO while framing the assessment was satisfied with the books of the appellant and did not even pass any adverse remarks on the same. There being no evidence, apart from the specious admission of disclosure obtained during survey, the impugned addition made to his t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 133A of the I.T Act 1961 was recorded without any oath. Therefore, unless some other corroborative material was collected by the revenue officer, no addition can be made on the basis of alleged disclosure statement. For buttressing his contention, he relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. S. Khader Khan Son reported in (2008) 300 ITR 157 (Mad.). This jud ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reliance upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of Paul Mathews & Sons Vs. CIT reported in (2003) 263 ITR 101 (Ker.) has held that section 133A empowers the authority to record the statement of any person, which may be useful for, or relevant to any proceeding under the Act. This section only enables the authority to record any statement of any person, which may be useful, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
