2025 (7) TMI 744

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of the appeal before it against the order dated 30.03.2015 passed u/s 153A r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as 'the Act') by the DCIT, Central Circle-08, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. AO). 2. Heard and perused the records. Ld. AR has argued on the additional grounds and same are reproduced below:- "1. That the assessment order dated 30.03.2015 passed u/s 153A(1) r.w.s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") by the Assessing Officer ("A.O.") and the additions made therein are illegal, bad in law and without jurisdiction and the same are liable to be deleted. The said order passed and the addition made thereunder is illegal and without the mandate of law. 2. That the assessment order....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rch. 4. Ld. AR has submitted that the addition is made by solely placing reliance on the statement of a third party recorded during the search on the third party. The statement was never provided/confronted to the Assessee by the AO.Ld. AR relied decision in 'PCIT, Circle 3 Vs. Anand Kumar Jain (HUF) ITA No. 23/2021, judgement dated 12.02.2021 by the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court to contend that statement of another person cannot be considered incriminating material without corroboration. The relevant extract is reproduced as below: "7. The preliminary question under consideration before us is whether a statement under Section 132(4) constitutes incriminating material for carrying out assessment under S. 153(A) of the Act. A reading ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on. This statement certainly has the evidentiary value and relevance as contemplated under the explanation to section 132(4) of the Act. However, this statement cannot, on a standalone basis, without reference to any other material discovered during search and seizure operations, empower the AO to frame the block assessment 5. Reliance was also placed in the case 'PCIT v. Best Infrastructure (India) Pvt. Ltd., ITA No. 13/2017' order dated 01.08.2017 passed by Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court. Relevant extract of the same is reproduced as below: "38. Fifthly, statements recorded under Section 132(4) of the Act of the Act do not by themselves constitute incriminating material as has been explained by this Court in Commissioner of Income ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f the Act). As noted above, the Assessee had no opportunity to cross-examine the said witness, but that apart, the mandatory procedure under section 153C has not been followed. On this count alone, we find no perversity in the view taken by the ITAT. Therefore, we do not find any substantial question of law that requires our consideration." 7. Ld. DR has submitted that case of Anand Kumar Jain (supra) pertained to abated year of assessment. It was submitted that statement of specific fact constitutes incriminating material and all conditions of section 68 of the Act were satisfied. 8. On admitted facts it comes up that the case of revenue is that as per the statement of Sh. Anil Kumar Jain, accommodation entries were provided to Rockland....