https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463629 ITAT MUMBAI held for the assessee, disallowing a Rs.70.00 lac addition made solely on a statement recorded under section 132(4). The Tribunal found the assessment contrary to CBDT instructions prohibiting elicitation of confessional statements during search/survey and to the relevant HC decision, noting absence of independent material corroborating the alleged undisclosed income. Findings by the CIT(A) that the statement altered departmental position were inconsistent with CBDT mandate. As the assessee furnished required particulars of sales and expenditure and the AO pointed to no defects, the addition was deleted. en-us Tue, 17 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 09 Sep 2025 15:16:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463629 ITAT MUMBAI held for the assessee, disallowing a Rs.70.00 lac addition made solely on a statement recorded under section 132(4). The Tribunal found the assessment contrary to CBDT instructions prohibiting elicitation of confessional statements during search/survey and to the relevant HC decision, noting absence of independent material corroborating the alleged undisclosed income. Findings by the CIT(A) that the statement altered departmental position were inconsistent with CBDT mandate. As the assessee furnished required particulars of sales and expenditure and the AO pointed to no defects, the addition was deleted. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 17 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463629