TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (11) TMI 285
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that the other concerns were not benami of the assessee is borne out from the record ?" 2. The facts in brief are that on 08.08.1990 a search and seizure operation was conducted by the Income Tax Authorities on the business premises of the assessee u/s 132 of the I.T. Act. Statement of the assessee was recorded by the authorized Officer u/s 132(4) and during that course the assessee admitted that one Kamal Traders, Naman Traders, Adarsh Textiles and Sampat Traders were benami concerns of the assesssee and these business concerns were being run by the assessee in the name of his employees. Thereafter, the statement of the concerned employees were also recorded, wherein it was admitted that the businesses run in the name of the assessee him....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ns in its order. 4. As against this, Mr. Soparkar, learned Senior counsel heavily relied upon the decision of this Court in the case of Kailashben Manharlal Chokshi v. CIT [2010] 328 ITR 411, more particularly paragraph No.23. In the aforesaid case, the judgment rendered in CIT v. DLF United [2000] 243 ITR 855 (SC) has been referred. Paragraph No.23 of the decision of Kailashben Manharlal Chokshi (supra) reads as under:- "23. The main grievance of the Assessing Officer was that the statement was not retracted immediately and it was done after two months. It was an afterthought and made under legal advise. However, if such retraction is to be viewed in light of the evidence furnished alongwith the affidavit, it would immediately be clear t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... construction of the first floor and that amount was invested out of the undisclosed income. Hence there is no justification for making account of Rs. 4 lacs merely on the basis of statement recorded under Section 132 (4). None of the authorities have considered this explanation and the CIT(A) as well as Tribunal both have proceeded on the footing that the Assessing Officer has considered the explanation. So far as the addition on account of gold ornament to the tune of Rs. 1 lac is concerned, the assessee has given the explanation that was reproduced by the Assessing Officer in his assessment order which says that during the course of search and seizure proceeding, statement of assessee's wife, Smt. Kailashben Chokshi was recorded and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....irmation from the party concerned have been filed by the assessee before the Assessing Officer. Since no payment of this additional furniture was made by the assessee till the date of search, no addition could have been made on this count." 5. We have heard learned advocates appearing for both the parties and perused the material available on record. The Tribunal while deciding the appeal in paragraph No.8 has observed as under:- "8. We have heard the assessee's counsel and the D.R. We are of the opinion that the CIT(A) when he relied upon the statement of the assessee made on 8.8.90 ignored the fact that there were two statements recorded on that day. The first statement was recorded at the 8 am. and second statement was recorded at ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... his benami. In answer to question No.24 he accepted that all the concerns mentioned in question No.22 are his benami concerns. In answer to question No.26 he accepted that certain bank accounts were his benami bank accounts. In answer to question No.27 he further agreed that all the deposits made in the name of his employees are his deposits. In answer to question No.33 he disclosed an income of Rs. 15 lakhs. He could not give any further details on that date. On 31.8.90 another statement of this assessee was recorded. In that he accepted that he was a partner in Padam Enterprises as individual and in Mahavir Trading Co. as HUF. In answer to question No.14 he stated that through the two concerns of Sugam Textiles and Shanti Traders the pro....