TMI Blog2020 (1) TMI 1021X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Act does not empower any Income Tax Authority to examine any person on oath and therefore any admission made in a statement recorded during survey cannot by itself be made the basis of addition - the addition in dispute made by the AO and confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) is not tenable in the eyes of law, hence, the same is deleted. - Decided in favour of assessee. - I.T.A. No. 3898/DEL/2016 - - - Dated:- 2-1-2020 - Shri H.S. Sidhu, Judicial Member And Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Accountant Member For the Assessee : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. For the Department : Sh . Saras Kumar, Sr. DR. ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU : JM This appeal by the Assessee is directed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... irming the adhoc disallowance of RS. 60,000/- made by the AO on account of various expenses incurred during the year. 7. The appellant craves leave to add, amend or alter any of the grounds of appeal. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee has filed the return of income on 30.9.2012 declaring total income of ₹ 14,62,390/-. The return of the assessee was processed u/s. 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short Act ) accepting the income returned. In this case a Survey action was carried out u/s. 133A of the Act on 23.3.2012 and statement of assessee was recorded on 23.3.2012 alongwith this, surrender letter and post dated cheques for payment of demand was submitted by the assessee whe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee with respect to the circumstances under which the surrender was made and also rejected the contention of the assessee that the amount of ₹ 75 lacs was not the real income of the assessee and hence cannot be exigible to tax irrespective of the same being surrendered at the time of survey. Hence, the addition in dispute may be deleted. 4. On the contrary, Ld. DR relied upon the orders of the authorities below. 5. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the order passed by the authorities below and the paper book filed by the assessee. We find that the issue in dispute is that addition of ₹ 75,00,000/- was made by the AO on the basis of the survey carried out at the premises of the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssioner of Income Tax, Rohtak range whereby he has offered additional income of ₹ 75,OO,OOO/- to cover up discrepancies on account of excess stock, wages and expenditure on renovation of building. The assessee thereafter on 30.03.2012 has filed an ITR with Ld. CIT, Rohtak Range Rohtak, placed at paper book pages 48-49 whereby he has stated that on 23.03.2012 a survey was carried out and around 35 people barged into his premises around 12:00 PM and he was forced to sign some paper along with cheque of ₹ 23,17,500/. It was also stated in the said letter that the liability generated is totally unjust. The assesse has filed another letter dated 02.07.2012 addressed to the Income Tax Office, Ward (1), Rohtak placed at paper book page ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted out that it is simply stated as per observation of survey team which indicate that assessee has been pressurized to make the declaration. The assessee also asked the AO to provide the details of ₹ 14,49,550/- of unaccounted wages as is being alleged. The assessee also submitted the details of building maintenance expenses placed at paper book pages 451-453 along with supporting evidences placed at paper book page 454 to 529. It was further submitted by the assessee that no paper/incriminating document relating to repair/addition to building was found during survey. The assessee further asked the AO if there any such document to provide the copy of the same. The assessee also asked the AO to provide the details of any expense or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 012 and 02.07.2012. It may be germane to mention here that reference to these letter dated 30.03.2012 has been stated by the assessee in its letter dated 25.03.2015 which has been quoted by the AO in its assessment order. Thus, this letter dated 30.03.2012 was filed by the assessee and there is no rebuttal to this letter. The entire addition is based on the surrender on the basis of a letter dated 24.03.2012 which stand retracted by letter dated 30.03.2012 and 02.07.2012. Moreover, this surrender is not under oath. The AO has not brought any material to rebut the explanation of the assesse. Further, the issue is also covered by the judgment of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Khader Khan Son reported in (2012) 254 CTR 229 wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
