TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (6) TMI 1182
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... short "the Act") dated 15.03.2014 for the Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The only issue to be decided in this appeal of the revenue is as to whether the ld CITA was justified in deleting the addition made on account of undisclosed purchase of Rs. 57,34,905/- in the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. The brief facts of this issue are that the assessee is a partnership firm engaged in the business of book trading. A survey operation u/s 133A of the Act was conducted in the business premises of the assessee at No. 54, College Street, Kolkata - 700073 and Godown at 54/6, College Street, Kolkata - 700073 and Office of 8/B, Bhawani Dutta Lane, Kolkata - 700073 on 14.2.2011. The ld AO observed that the books of accounts together with the requ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e fell behind time as the programmer maintaining the computerized accounting had been absent for a long stretch of time from September till mid - November 2010 for serious attack of jaundice. He resumed data feeding on return to duty but was yet to catch up with the lost time by the time the survey intervened. Till the date of survey, he could feed data in segments not showing the state of affairs as on the date of survey . So on the date of survey, the full accounts for that date was not available. There is no evidence of actual shortages on any count. The assessee pleaded that exercise of building up the account and the physical verification of stock of books as on the date of survey, despite the wide backlog is claimed to have been accom....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... survey team ignoring the primary documents maintained by the assessee. It was argued that the statement from Sri Dipankar Sen was extracted from him by psychological pressure, intimidation and duress. The assessee placed reliance on the CBDT Letter in F.No. 286/2/2003/IT(Inv.) dated 11.3.2003 and decision of Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs S Khader Khan reported in (2010) 210 Taxman 246 (Mad). There was absolutely no independent evidence corroborating the statement recorded from the partner. On the contrary, the purchase as per the assessee's record till date of survey i.e 14.2.2011 was in the sum of Rs. 7,93,38,109/- and the sum of Rs. 57,34,905/- alleged as undisclosed purchase was more than covered proving the allegation....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....by the assessee which was supported by proper evidences and documents to establish why the statement made at the time of survey is not being adhered to. The ld CITA observed that the assessee in the assessment proceedings intimated to the ld AO what are the correct facts and filed evidences in support of its claim. The assessee had supported its contentions based on the entries in the regular books of accouns that were duly audited and submitted before the ld AO. The ld AO categorically agrees that the said books of accounts were examined by him in the assessment proceedings and no adverse remarks were passed on the same by him in his order. The books of accounts submitted by the assessee were not rejected by the ld AO. Accordingly, the ld ....