https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346192 HC held that additions under s.68 based on directors' statements recorded during a search could not be sustained because the statements were recorded behind the assessee's back, no opportunity to cross-examine was afforded, and there was no corroborative evidence; seizure material and other records contradicted those statements. The Court also held the assumption of jurisdiction under s.153A unjustified for preceding assessment years, as the surrendered amount related only to the year of search and seized documents were not incriminating for earlier years. Appeal allowed for the assessee. en-us Tue, 01 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 13 Sep 2025 11:42:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346192 HC held that additions under s.68 based on directors' statements recorded during a search could not be sustained because the statements were recorded behind the assessee's back, no opportunity to cross-examine was afforded, and there was no corroborative evidence; seizure material and other records contradicted those statements. The Court also held the assumption of jurisdiction under s.153A unjustified for preceding assessment years, as the surrendered amount related only to the year of search and seized documents were not incriminating for earlier years. Appeal allowed for the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 01 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346192