2024 (3) TMI 102

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nce raised by the assessee in various grounds of appeal is against the confirmation of addition of Rs. 1,97,94,148/- by ld. CIT(Appeals) as made by the ld. Assessing Officer by rejecting the loss from trading in shares/securities. 3. The facts in brief are that the assessee filed the return of income on 29.11.2014 declaring total income of 'NIL', which was processed under section 143(1) on 15.06.2015 and a refund of Rs. 22,83,940/- was granted to the assessee. Thereafter the case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny through CASS and the statutory notices were issued and duly served upon the assessee. The assessee is a NBFC Company and is involved in trading and investment in shares, advancement of loans on interest etc. During the yea....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rder. Against the order, the ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal of the assessee after giving his finding on this issue. 5. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the material available on record, we find that in this case, the ld. Assessing Officer has received information from Directorate of Investigation, New Delhi that the assessee is an entry operator engaged in the business of providing accommodation entries by trading in purchase and sale of shares and advancing unsecured loans. The ld. Assessing Officer on the basis of said information recorded a finding in para 2 at page 2 of the assessment order that the transactions of shares appears to be suspicious without carrying out any investigation on the information receive d....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... proceeding. However, the ld. Assessing Officer has not done any inquiry and has merely harped on the statement of Shri Rajesh Kumar Surana recorded on 18.06.2013 by recording a finding in para 2 at page 2 of the assessment order that the transactions of the assessee raises suspicion and, therefore, cannot be accepted. We also note that no cross objection was even allowed to the assessee. We note that in this case, the statement given on oath has even been retracted on 22.03.2016 by filing an affidavit and, therefore, it has no evidentiary value as the authorities below have not brought any corroborative evidence to that effect. In our opinion it is settled legal position that a confession given during survey has no evidentiary value unless....