TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (9) TMI 847
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....owing substantial question of law:- "Whether the Tribunal was right in law in ignoring the facts on records as also the provisions of ss. 132(4) and 132(4A) of the IT Act, 1961 and holding that the addition of Rs. 9,00,000 made by the AO on account of commission income and confirmed by the CIT(A) was without any basis?" 3. Facts necessary for adjudication of the present appeal, as narrated therein, are that the search was conducted at the residence of the assessee on 15th April, 1993. The assessee being individual filed his return on 28th March, 1994 declaring an income of Rs. 2,00,000. The assessment was completed on 31st March, 1999 (Annex. A) by the Dy. CIT and the income was assessed at Rs. 13,02,440 by making additi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....,434 A-5 22,67,750 A-6 48,38,438 Total 4,92,03,005" 6. It was further urged that the said documents belong to the assessee in view of provisions of s. 132(4A) of the Act as the same were seized during the course of the search from the premises of the assessee. Learned counsel contended that the assessment order was rightly upheld by the CIT(A) but the Tribunal erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 9,00,000 on account of income from commission on sales received from M/s P.M.S. Enterprises, Phagwara. 7. Controverting the above submission, learned counsel for the assessee argued that the Revenue had failed to bring any material on record which could have substantiated their plea that the assessee had earned commi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 10. Sub-s. (4) of s. 132 enables the authorised officer to record on oath the statement of the persons who are found to be in possession or control of article or thing at the time of search. Under this provision, the AO is empowered to use such statement against the assessee and base the assessment thereon. However, where the assessee is able to establish that the statement so made was not voluntary but was a result of coercion or inducement, the same may not be acted upon. The onus lies very heavy upon the assessee in such circumstances to prove such coercion or inducement. Further, the assessee can produce evidence to rebut the statement recorded under s. 132(4) of the Act. Explanation inserted by Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1987,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of account, other documents, money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable articles seized from the possession of a person, shall be presumed to belong to such person in whose possession or control they are found during the search. A similar presumption is raised regarding the truthfulness of the contents of the books of accounts which are found. Presumption also arises in respect of signatures and every other part of the books of account to be in the handwriting of the person by whom it is purported to have been written. Similarly, if they are stamped, executed or attested, a presumption may be made to be duly stamped and executed or attested by the persons by whom it purports to have been executed or attested. The aforesaid presumptions ar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... case. It is not in dispute that the assessee had made a statement under s. 132(4) of the Act whereby a surrender of Rs. 2,00,000 was made. Besides this, the assessee had admitted that he had earned commission from M/s P.M.S. Enterprises, Phagwara which was not disclosed in the return filed by him. The relevant portion of the statement reads as follows:- "I am selling agent of M/s P.M.S. Enterprises, Railway Road, Phagwara and get commission @ 2 per cent on the sales effected through me. I have no other source of income except interest from firm on deposit with the firm. My wife is a housewife and does tailoring work on a very small scale." 16. Further, during search, certain sale documents were seized which bore the sig....