TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (8) TMI 1270
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rned CIT(A)-I, Surat has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,71,92,996/- made by Assessing Officer being the amount difference of Rs. 3,12,00,000/- an undisclosed amount admitted during the course of search and Rs. 1,43,68,982/- credited by the assessee as undisclosed income in the P&L A/c attached with the return of income holding that the Assessing Officer has not brought on record any material evidences to show that the submission of the assessee of having undisclosed amount of Rs. 143,68,982/- as credited by the assessee in the P&L a/c as against Rs. 3.12 lacs admitted during the course of search proceedings is factually incorrect." 3. The assessee is assessed as an individual. The department conducted a survey on 2.2.2007 in his g....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....leaving behind the remaining sum in question of Rs. 1,71,92,996/-. 5. The assessee preferred an appeal. The CIT(A) has accepted his contentions as under: "2.4.1 I have considered the submission made by the appellant and the observation of the A.O. From the above, it is seen that the A.O. has verified the impounded Annexure BF-1 to BF-10 and has brought no material on record to counter the factual statements made by the assessee that the total receipts as per the impounded annexure BF-1 to BF-10 is only Rs. 1,43,68,982/-. The A.O. has stated that the entire surrendered amount of Rs. 3.12 crores is added only because the assessee has admitted to this income during the courseof survey. In this regard, the A.O. relied on the decision of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ppellant in his Return of Income. The appellant has stated that it had disclosed the amount Rs. 3.12 Crore under the impression as during the course of Survey proceedings the officers shown the seized material on which the income disclosed is shown as the transactions are of about 2.85 Crores. Under this impression they insisted to accept the transaction as income which at the time of survey could not be analysed properly and accepted as income. After receipt of Xerox and making analysis of them it is found that the total receipt is only Rs. 1.44 Crores including the opening Balance and the Payments are Approx 1.38 Crores only. The Income should only be tax or the expenses (Which ever is higher) the receipt and payment both cannot be take....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ow that the A.O. has made the impugned huge addition only because the appellant admitted earning of such unaccounted income vide his statement recorded during the course of survey in his case though the impounded materials do not indicate such earning of unaccounted income bv the appellant. 2.4.4 The following case laws clearly show that the A.O. could not make any addition beyond the impounded papers; -In a recent case of ACIT Vs. Satyanarayan Agarwal (255-ITR-(AT)69), the Calcutta ITAT has held that in absence of any corroborative evidence the statement recorded at the time of survey cannot be made as basis of assessment. While taking this view by the Hon'ble ITAT relied on the decision of Allahabad High Court in the case of Abdul Q....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....survey, was wrong and that the additional income earned was limited only to Rs. 1,43,68,982/- and not Rs. 3,12,00,000/- which was declared by the assessee. This view of the Hon'ble Supreme Court was followed by the Allahabad High Court in the case of S.C. Gupta Vs. CIT 2001 248 ITR 782, as also by the Pune Bench of the ITAT in the case of Hotel Kiran Vs. ACIT 2002 82 ITT 453. The ITAT held that even though the admission by a person is a good piece of evidence yet it is not conclusive. The assessee can retract from the admission made only under two circumstances. One is when the statement is made involuntarily, i.e. obtained under coercion, threat, duress or undue influence, which is not the case here, no such claim has been made by the ....