2015 (9) TMI 1657

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ole ground of the appeal is against deleting the addition of Rs. 15 lacs on account of undisclosed income admitted in the statement recorded U/s 132(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act). The assessee is a commission agent and CNF agent of medicine and having interest income. The assessee filed his return on 30/09/2009 declaring total income of Rs. 2,50,620/-. A search was conducted on 27/08/2008. Various assets/books of account and documents were found and seized as per annexure prepared during search. The case was scrutinized U/s 153A read with Section 143(3) of the Act. The ld Assessing Officer observed that during course of search, statement of assessee was recorded U/s 132(4) of the Act on 28/08/2008. The assessee had offered additional income of Rs. 15 lacs in his individual capacity earned from medicine business. The relevant portion of the statement is reproduced below:- The surrender of income was reconfirmed by Shri Radhey Shyam Mittal on behalf of the assessee in the statement recorded U/s 131 of the IT Act on 05/09/2008. The relevant portion of the statement is reproduced as under:  On verification of the return, it is found that the assessee has ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... a suo motu admission in reply to a very simple and initial question "what are your sources of income". Further the fact that the assessee group had made huge investment in real-estate/properties bears testimony to the above admission. He relied on the following decisions: (i) Sterling Machine Tools Vs. CIT 122 ITR 926 (All) (ii) CIT Vs. Durga Prasad 82 ITR 540 (SC). (iii) Dr. S.C. Gupta Vs. CIT 248 ITR 782 (All). (iv) Surjit Singh Chhaba 135 Taxman 711, 712 (SC). (v) Hotel Kiran Vs. ACIT 82 ITD 453 (Pune). (vi) 89 ITD (Ahm) (T.M.) Ramesh Patel. (vii) Parm Anand Builders P Ltd. Vs. ITO 59 ITD 29. It is further held that the statement given U/s 132(4) has evidentiary value and assessee's retraction was not valid as made after seven months from the date of search, which is afterthought. The ld Assessing Officer thus made addition of Rs. 15 lacs in the income of the assessee. 3. Being aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee the matter before the ld CIT(A), who had deleted the addition by observing as under:- "4.4 I have carefully perused the order of the A.O., submissions of the AR and ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... given in presence of witness and various officers of the department. The assessee had admitted that he was indulging in unauthorized medicine business and earned undisclosed income. The ld CIT(A) by relying on the decision of Hon'ble ITAT in the case of Shri Radheshyam Mittal Vs. DCIT in ITA No. 420/JP/2012 for A.Y. 2009-10 had allowed the appeal in favour of the assessee without comparing the facts and circumstances of the case and evidence filed during the course of search. Therefore, he prayed to confirm the order of the Assessing Officer. He further relied on the decision in the V.Kunhambu & Sons Vs. CIT (1996) 219 ITR 235 (Ker) wherein the Hon'ble High Court has held that authorized officer could record statement on oath on all matters pertaining to the suppressed income. Statement could not be confined only to the books of account. Explanation to Sub-Section (4) inserted w.e.f. 1st April, 1989 seeks to clarify the necessary import of the main provision. It has neither changed the substantive provision nor does it provide a different method of using the statement recorded U/s 132(4). The Tribunal had rejected for valid reasons the assessee's plea that statement U/s 132(4)....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Ashok Kumar Soni 291 ITR 172 (Raj.) (iii) CIT Vs. G. Krishnan (1994) 210 ITR 707 Mad. (iv) Gargidin Jwala Prasad Vs. CIT (1974) 96 ITR 97 (All) (v) Chitra Devi Vs. ACIT (2002) 28 Taxworld 454 (ITAT JP) He further vehemently relied on the order of the ld CIT(A) and prayed to confirm the order of the ld CIT(A). 6. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the material available on record. It is undisputed fact that besides statement U/s 132(4), no incriminating documents were found during the course of search including undisclosed cash/assets as revealed from the assessment order of the assessee. The search was conducted on 27-28/08/2008 and statement was recorded U/s 132(4) on 28/08/2008. Copy of statement was provided by the Assessing Officer on 13/3/2009 even various requests had been made by the assessee before the DDIT(In) to provide the copy of statement. After considering the assessee's own statement and copy of seized material, he decided to retract the statement given U/s 132(4) on 31/3/2009, which was supported by the affidavit filed by the assessee dated 31/3/2009. The Coordinate Bench has considered the statement ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ापार होता है | M/s Suresh Medical Agency के अलावा मैं अपनी व्यक्तिगत Capacity में दवाईयों की खरीद बिक्री करता हॅू एवं इस प्रकार से मैनें चालू वित्तीय वर्ष में लगभग 15 लाख रूपये की आय अर्जित की है। इसे मैं चालू वित्तीय वर्ष की आयकर विवरणी भरते वक्त अतिरिक्त à....