TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (7) TMI 1524
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..../2002 for the Assessment Year 1990-91 to 1999-2000, the revenue has preferred the present Tax Appeals for consideration of the following substantial question of law: TAX APPEAL NO. 1531 OF 2007 (i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is right in deleting addition of Rs. 35 lakhs towards benami investment in the name of Shri Daulaji? (ii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is right in coming to the conclusion that the amount investeed initially has been rotated in the construction projects, when both the projects, namely, Vivekanand Complex and Brindavan Developers, were undetaken s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ances of the case, and in law, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is right in deleting the following additions made by the Assessing Officer: i. On account of undisclosed investment in the form of benami investment Rs. 35,00,000/- ii. On account of unexplained investment in purchasing and reconstruction of flats, household expenses and unexplained gifts. Rs. 18,80,000/- iii. On account of unexplained receipts Rs. 2,98,980/- iv. On account of unaccounted purchases and undisclosed profit Rs. 4,20,682/- 2. A search operation under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) was carried out at the business and residential premises of the assessee and various documents were found disclosing und....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y applying the principles of telescoping. He submitted that once disclosure statement under Section 132(4) of the Act during the search proceedings is given, the same cannot be retracted as the same is an admissible evidence against the person making the disclosure. 4. Mr. S.N. Soparkar, learned Senior Counsel appearing with Mr. B.S. Soparkar, learned advocate for the assessee submitted that the revenue has failed to refute the assessee's retraction by way of any concrete proof. He submitted that other than the alleged disclosure u/s 132(4), no undisclosed cash, jewellery, valuable article, property details, assets or books or documents or any other material which could be considered as undisclosed income was found. He submitted that the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....undisclosed income having been found during the search. 5.1 In the case of Kailashben Chokshi (supra), this Court has held as under: "22. We have heard learned counsels appearing for the respective parties at great length and considered the submissions. We have also gone through the orders passed by the authorities below. It is true that in normal circumstances this Court would not interfere in the finding of fact arrived at by the authorities. It is, however, to be seen as to whether the explanation tendered by the assessee would be considered by the authorities below. It is also to be seen as to whether an addition made is merely based on the statement recorded by the Assessing Officer under Section 132(4) of the Act and wheth....