For making additions, FIR is contemporaneous evidence and the contents of the same cannot be ignored in the light of self-serving documents

DCIT Vs Mr Sanjeev R Kanwar (ITAT Mumbai)- For making additions, FIR is contemporaneous evidence and the contents of the same cannot be ignored in the light of self-serving documents. Human conduct and human probabilities are to be given weight age over the self generated evidences.

The learned counsel for the assessee has cited the judgement of the Supreme Court in the case of George & Others Vs. State of Kerala & Another, cited supra to contend that FIR is not substantive evidence and cannot be relied upon and that it only requires the police officer to carry out  investigation. In the present case, however, the question is whether the assessee who has filed the FIR on  the basis that he and his business associates had advanced Rs. 5 crores in cash to Mr. Amit Singh Gill can turn around and say that the amount advanced was not more than Rs. 1,87,50,000/-. In the aforesaid judgement, it has been held that FIR is not substantive evidence unless admitted under section 32(1) of the Evidence Act and can be used to corroborate or contradict the maker thereof.  What the departmental authorities have done in the present case is to contradict the assessee’s  version that he paid only Rs. 1,87,50,000/- through the two companies to Mr. Amit Singh Gill by  relying on the FIR in which he had stated that he paid Rs. 5 crores in cash to Mr. Amit Singh Gill. The conduct of the Assessing Officer  is  not  in  any  manner  contrary  to  the judgement cited above. In the result we reverse the decision of the CIT(A) and restore the addition of Rs. 3,12,50,000/-. The appeal of the department is allowed.

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

‘E’ BENCH, MUMBAI.

I.T.A. No. 5271/Mum/2009

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.