2024 (2) TMI 1435

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... -2 has instituted the present appeals seeking to impugn the judgment rendered by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ["ITAT"] dated 31 January 2018 and proposes the following question for our consideration:- A. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the ITAT erred in sustaining the deletion of INR 4.2 crores on account of retraction of additional income disclosed under the head 'income from other sources/undisclosed income/undisclosed investment', ignoring that such a retraction was impermissible and unsustainable in law? 2. The issue itself appears to emanate from a search and survey operation conducted in respect of the Aryan Sainik Group on 12 April 2012. During the course of that search, the Income Tax of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ph 18 observed as follows:- "18. There are many judicial precedents relied up on by both the parties. We have carefully considered them while deciding the issues before us. We Now coming to various case laws, which we think are relevant, which have been relied upon by the revenue as well as assessee to show their implications. First decision relied upon is of Hon'ble Madras High Court in case of B Kishore Kumar Vs. Dy. CIT 52 Taxmann.com 449. In that particular case the addition was of Rs. 5273920/- on the basis of document and the statement. No such statement was retracted by the assessee. In the present case the assessee has ample made clear that though the waiver may be the income but same is not taxable. Further in the case....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ount not taxable in India at all. Further, the reliance on Pr. CIT Vs. Avinsash kumar Setia (Supra) the Hon'ble Delhi High Court held that when the assessee has surrendered income by ways of declaration and withdrew the same after two years without any satisfactory *explanation such retraction could not be bonafide. In the present case assessee disclosed Rs. 150 crores and immediately after that retracted Rs. 86 crores based on legal advise that above sum is not chargeable to tax in India. In view of this the decision relied upon by the revenue cannot help its case. Furthermore, the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in 184 ITR 404 has held that erroneous admission by the assessee cannot be a foundation for the assessment whereas it was o....