TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (9) TMI 480
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....stions of law:- (1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT was justified in law in deciding that the letter dated 15.01.1998 of the assessee addressed to the ADIT about the disclosure of Rs. 80 lakhs as income has no evidentiary value as stated under Section 132(4)? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT was justified in law in accepting the assessee's claim of sale of goods on various dates in absence of any evidence to that effect while deleting the addition of Rs. 65 lakhs? (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT was correct in law in deciding that the source of entire purchases has been explained as out of the initial capital of Rs. 3....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the order dated 29th February, 2000 of the CIT (A), the Revenue filed an appeal to the Tribunal. The Tribunal by the impugned order dated 28th November, 2003, on bare reading of Section 132(4) of the Act, dismissed the Revenue's appeal by upholding that the statement/letter dated 15th January, 1998 was not made during the course of search but much after the search was completed on 4th December, 1997. Consequently, it held that the letter dated 15th January, 1998 would not have evidentiary value of a statement under Section 132(4) of the Act. Thus, dismissed the Revenue's appeal. (f) The grievance of the Revenue is that the letter dated 15th January, 1998 is self incriminating statement made by the respondent- Assessee before the as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r dated 25th January, 1995 is not recorded on oath by the authorized officer during the course of search. Therefore, it cannot be of an evidentiary value in terms of Section 132(4) of the Act. The facts in the present case are identical. (i) In view of the self evident position as indicated on bare reading of Section 132(4) of the Act, Question No. (1) is answered in affirmative i.e. in favour of the respondent - Assessee and against the appellant - Revenue. 4. Regarding Question No.(2):- (a) The respondent - Assessee was searched during the period of 25th November, 1997 to 4th December, 1997 under the provisions of Section 132 of the Act. On 31st December, 1997, the respondent - Assessee filed a declaration under the Voluntary Disclosur....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (A) by order dated 29th February, 2000, allowed the appeal of the respondent - Assessee. (d) Being aggrieved, the Revenue carried the issue in appeal to the Tribunal. By the impugned order dated 28th November, 2003 the Tribunal, dismissed the Revenue's appeal inter-alia holding that under the provisions of Chapter XIV(B) of the Act, the undisclosed income for the Block Period has to be completed on the basis of material found in the course of the search. This declaration made by the respondent - Assessee under the VDIS scheme is not material discovered during the course of search as it was made after the search. Therefore, the same can not form the basis of assessment under Chapter XIV(B) of the Act. In support the impugned order reli....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d to add back to the income of the assessee on the basis of the Department Valuer's report obtained subsequent to the order of the regular assessment. Hence, the Tribunal was right in deleting the said addition. Accordingly, question No.3 is answered in the affirmative i.e. in favour of the assessee and against the Department." Mr. Thakar learned counsel for the respondent - Assessee also invites our attention to the decision of Madras High Court in case of CIT v. P. K. Ganeshwar [2009] 308 ITR 124 and the Delhi High Court in CIT v. Ravi Kant Jain [2001] 250 ITR 141 to the same effect. (f) As the impugned order of the Tribunal has only applied to the decision of this Court in Vinod Danchand Ghodwat (supra), no fault can be found with ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....imed were from unrecorded sales. The claim of the Assessee in this regard is that even in the statement recorded in the course of search was that he did not know name of the party to whom the goods were sold in cash. Apart from this, the entire transaction being unrecorded, the claim of the Assessee of availability of cash from sale proceeds cannot be doubted only on the basis of non-availability of names of the purchasers from the Assessee. Moreover, the Tribunal also held that during the course of search, no stock of timber logs was found in the business premises of the Assessee. Thus, evidencing the fact that it had been traded. A sum of Rs. 25 lakhs was paid by the Assessee from his regular books of accounts for purchases effected from ....