Income-tax survey u/s133A: on-the-spot tax collection barred; no cross-examination right; estimated sales and GP upheld, appeal dismissed.

In a challenge to additions based on a survey under s.133A, the HC held that while income-tax authorities may inspect premises and record statements, they cannot demand on-the-spot tax collection, and there is no statutory right to cross-examine persons whose statements are recorded during survey. Since the estimation of sales and gross profit was founded not solely on such statements but on cumulative material-shop location, past history, defects in books, and contemporaneous statements-its acceptance by the AO, as modified by the first appellate authority and affirmed by the Tribunal, was a pure finding of fact. As sufficiency of evidence does not raise a substantial question of law, the appeal was dismissed.

---

---

Issues involved: Appeal u/s 260A of the Income-tax Act against the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal for the assessment year 1993-94.

Details of the Judgment:

1. Survey and Impounding of Books of Account:
The appellant, engaged in the manufacture and sale of sweets and namkeen, had a survey conducted u/s 133A of the Income-tax Act at the shop and factory premises. The books of account were impounded u/s 131 of the Act. Additionally, the Sales Tax Department independently conducted a survey at the premises, revealing various defects in the appellant's bookkeeping practices.

2. Assessment and Appeals Process:
The Assessing Officer, after scrutinizing the impounded documents and considering specific defects, invoked section 145(2) of the Income-tax Act to make additions to the trading results declared by the assessee. The assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act. Subsequent appeals were made to the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and then to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, which dismissed the appeal on March 3, 2000.

3. Cross-Examination of Witnesses:
The appellant contended that the Tribunal heavily relied on statements of workers and salesmen without giving an opportunity for cross-examination. However, the court held that under section 133A, an income-tax authority can record statements during a survey without allowing cross-examination. The estimation of sales was not solely based on these statements but on various factors related to the business, and the Tribunal's decision was upheld.

4. Substantial Question of Law:
The court emphasized that for a second appeal u/s 260A of the Income-tax Act, it must involve a substantial question of law. In this case, the conclusion reached by the assessing authority and affirmed by the Appellate Tribunal was based on the material on record, and the sufficiency of evidence for factual conclusions does not raise a substantial question of law.

Conclusion:
The appeal was found to lack merit and was dismissed by the court.

---