Tribunal dismisses Revenue's appeal, emphasizes need for corroborative evidence and procedural fairness.

The tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition of Rs. 10 crores made by the A.O, citing lack of corroborative evidence and failure to adhere to procedural fairness. The Revenue's appeals were dismissed, emphasizing the importance of corroborative evidence for statements made during surveys and the necessity of maintaining procedural fairness by confronting the assessee with relevant documents.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Deletion of addition made by the A.O on account of unexplained money amounting to Rs. 10,00,00,000/-.
2. Evidentiary value of statements recorded during survey operations.
3. Adherence to principles of natural justice and procedural fairness.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Deletion of Addition Made by the A.O on Account of Unexplained Money Amounting to Rs. 10,00,00,000/-:
The appeals concern the deletion of an addition made by the Assessing Officer (A.O) based on a survey conducted on 20/11/2008, which impounded documents suggesting that the assessee received a significant portion of booking amounts in cash, not declared in the tax return. The A.O relied on a statement by a director of the assessee company, who voluntarily disclosed an additional income of Rs. 10 crores. However, this amount was not included in the return filed for the relevant assessment year, leading the A.O to add Rs. 10 crores as unexplained money.

2. Evidentiary Value of Statements Recorded During Survey Operations:
The CIT(A) deleted the addition, noting that the books of accounts were produced before the A.O, who failed to point out any deficiencies. The CIT(A) observed that the assessee followed the project completion method, and the statement made during the survey did not have evidentiary value unless supported by corroborated evidence. The CIT(A) emphasized that statements recorded under Section 133A do not hold evidentiary value unless corroborated by other evidence. The CIT(A) referred to legal precedents, including the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in CIT v/s S Kader Khan & Sons, which stated that statements recorded during surveys do not have evidentiary value unless supported by corroborative evidence.

3. Adherence to Principles of Natural Justice and Procedural Fairness:
The CIT(A) criticized the A.O for not confronting the assessee with the survey report and for not bringing any circumstantial evidence on record to show that cash was received in addition to the declared amount. The CIT(A) highlighted that the A.O did not apply his mind and blindly followed the survey report without corroborating evidence. The CIT(A) also pointed out that the A.O did not follow the CBDT instruction dated 10.3.2003, which mandates that no document can be used against any person unless the person is given a reasonable opportunity to submit their version. The CIT(A) cited the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Kishanchand Chellaram v/s Commissioner Of Income-Tax and the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in J.T.(India)Exports & Another v/s Union of India and Another, emphasizing the importance of adhering to principles of natural justice.

Conclusion:
The tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, agreeing that the A.O failed to provide corroborative evidence and did not adhere to procedural fairness. The appeals of the Revenue were dismissed, and the deletion of the addition of Rs. 10 crores was confirmed. The tribunal emphasized that statements made during surveys need corroborative evidence to hold evidentiary value and that procedural fairness must be maintained by confronting the assessee with all relevant documents.

---