TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (7) TMI 398
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... paid on the purchases of two plots in the name of his family members despite-the fact that the addition was made on the basis of the statement recorded on oath u/s. 131 of the Act wherein the assessee had admitted to have paid On Money of Rs. 15,12,000/- on the purchases of the plots in the name of the family members. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Id. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 15,12,000/- made on account of On Money paid on the purchases of two plots in the name of his family members ignoring the fact that affidavit filed by the assessee during the assessment proceedings on 24.12.2009 i.e. after a lapse of 3 yrs of recording of statement u/s. 131 was merely an after-thought as ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... issued to the assessee. In response to the same, the assessee filed an affidavit retracting the statement recorded on oath under section 131 of the Act on 21.9.2006. From this, the AO inferred that the affidavit dated 24.12.2009 was after after-thought and was made to cover up the retraction of unaccounted income disclosed at the time of recording the statement u/s.131 of the Act. The AO further observed that the figure of disclosure of unaccounted income was a specific figure and was disclosed by application of mind and knowledge, which was in the personal domain of the assessee. When assessee makes a disclosure before the income-tax authorities in respect of whom he was the best judge, he cannot go back on the same. The AO also observed ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t. Tarunaben C. Ragdawala and Shri Alkesh C. Ragdawala. In the affidavit filed before the A.O. all of them have confirmed that "they have purchased the said plot and Shri Paresh C. Ragdawala, the appellant, has no right, title and possession in the property and his statement regarding any payment towards this property are not binding to us." In view of the above facts, I am of the opinion that the appellant has no concern with purchase transaction of the properties in question and the A.O. has not taken the right decision in adding the so called on money to the total income of the appellant. Accordingly, the addition made is hereby deleted and the ground of appeal is allowed." 7. Before us, the AR of the assessee submitted that in the cou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... facts and on the basis of wrong footing and foundation, built an image on that and made high peach assessment. In fact, the Income Tax Officer (Inv.) has called the assessee and inquired about transaction made for specific properties and sought the details of rate, who are the seller etc. and recorded the statement without having such authority u/s,131 of the Act to him. Without prejudice to above basic and legal issue of recording the statement by the Income Tax Officer (Inv.) , We further state that the assessing officer has stated in Para 4.1 of the Assessment Order that assessee has purchased two plots (30/1 31/1). In fact no such plots were purchased by the assessee and question of paying on-money on the said plots does not arise at....