SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(ITAT) 4158

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (JAIPUR BENCH)
Shri Sandeep Gosain, JM, Dr Mitha Lal Meena, AM
The Revenue – Appellant
Versus
Shri Naresh Jain – Respondent
ITA No. 374/JP/2024



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT-DR
For the Respondents: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, Adv., Shri Hemang Gargieya, Adv.

Statements recorded during tax surveys lack evidentiary value if they contradict ample supporting evidence and admissions can be retracted, reflecting the principle that income cannot be taxed on admissions alone without corroborating documentation.

Headnote:(A) Income Tax Act, 1961 - Section 133A - Survey statements recorded without proper evidential consideration - Addition of undisclosed income based solely on uncorroborated statements of the assessee is not permissible - Court considered that the admissions made under duress cannot stand scrutiny when contradicted by adequate maintainable evidence in records. (Paras 3.1 - 3.5)

Facts of the case:
The Revenue's appeal challenged the deletion of several additions made for AY 2017-18, totaling to Rs. 1,83,20,000, which were based primarily on statements taken during survey proceedings. Notably, one such declaration involved a cash payment for a house purchase. The assessee refuted the claimed amounts, asserting their relevance to previous years, offering corroborative financial documents and maintaining that the marriage expense attributed to them was recorded under their spouse's accounts.

Findings of Court:
The Assessing Officer's reliance on survey statements alone was scrutinized, focusing on the absence of corroborative documentary evidence. The appellate authority dismissed several additions based on the valid explanation provided regarding the payment sources and prior disclosures.

Issues: The main issue was whether statements recorded under duress during survey can be sufficient grounds for income addition without corroborative evidence. Another issue involved the evaluation and consideration of rightful claims against previously declared income.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that merely relying on survey statements without corresponding evidence violates principles of fairness and administrative justice—especially when the admissions are retracted and exceptional corroborative explanations are presented. Additionally, the telescoping effect of past income declarations against new claims was duly considered, ensuring only one addition is made based on taxable income.

Result: Appeal dismissed; addition sustained only on limited undisclosed income.

Table of Content
1. overview of the income tax appeal and key details. (Para 1 , 2)
2. judicial perspective on evidentiary value of survey statements. (Para 3)

ORDER

PER: SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM

This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against order of the ld. CIT(A), Udaipur-2 dated 29-01-2024 for the assessment year 2017-18 raising therein following grounds of appeal.

‘’1 Whether on facts and in circumstances of the case, the Lad. CIT(A) is justified in ignoring the evidential basis of additions of Rs. 1,83,20,000/- available to the AO in the form of incriminating documents found and impounded during the survey containing all information of incriminating transactions recorded therein and further supported by the explanation and admission of Sh. Naresh Jain, in his statement recorded on oath us 131 during survey, who accepted these transactions to be unaccounted.

2 Whether on facts and in circumstances of case, the Ld. CTT(A) is justified in deleting addition of Rs 33,60,000/- made by AQ on the basis of incriminating documents containing registered document for purchase of property and supported by assessee's statement-by simply relying on dicta from the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Kerala in the case of C.K. Abdul Azeez vs. CIT. Central Circle, Calicut [2019] 111 taxmann.com 74(Kerala) that "Statement on oath made by an assessée to income tax authority during survey proceedings under section 133A is not conclusive, assesse can explain or withdraw admission, if any, made by him in such statement and assessment of tax cannot be made solely on basis of such sworn statement made by assesssee under section 133A(3)(iii) and such statement can be used to corroborate other materials before assessing authority, including contents of any document which does not apply directly to present case as the addition was made on concrete evidence.

3 Whether on facts and in circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) is justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 7,10,000/- not considering the fact that it was made on the basis of incriminating documents impounded and the true explanation of Naresh Jan in statement was recorded on oath u/s 131 and not u/s 133A (3)(iii) and the assesse failed to prove with registered conveyance deed of transfer of above property, and also failed to make it verified with the explanation of the sellers

4 Whether on facts and in circumstances of the case, the Ld. CTT(A) is justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 27,97,131/- out of total addition of Rs 35,00,000/-by not considering the fact that the assessee admitted in his statement recorded on oath u/s 131 and not u/s 133A(3)(iii) and the assesssee failed to explain the available documents and evidences in this regard

5 Whether on facts and m circumstances of the case. the Lil CIT(A) is justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 75,00,000/- made on account of marriage of son Shri Ativeer Jain by appreciating the retraction from his statement claiming that these expenses do not belong to him and belonged to Nisha Jain despite that it was recorded on oath u/s 131 during the survey

6 Whether on facts and in circumstances of the case. the Ld. CIT(A) is justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,43,67,131/- out of total additions of Rs 1,83,20,000- which were duly made on the basis of incriminating documents found and impounded during the survey and truly explained by Naresh Jain in the statement recorded during the survey

7 Whether on facts and in circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) is justified in giving telescoping effect to the assesse to set off Rs 46,43,251- against the sustained addition Rs. 49,02,869- resulting in sustenance of remaining additions of Rs. 2,59,618/-only.’’

2.1 It may be noted that the present appeal is preferred by the Revenue against the order of CIT(A) dt. 29.01.2024. Since the ld. CIT(A) has already stated the relevant facts hence, the same are not being repeated here. During the course of hearing, the parties were directed to file detailed written

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top