Kiran Fine Jewellers Pvt. Ltd Vs DCIT (ITAT Jaipur)
ITAT Jaipur held that addition towards unexplained money under section 69A of the Income Tax Act merely on the basis of statement which was subsequently retracted is not sustainable in law. Accordingly, addition is directed to be deleted.
Facts- Vide the present appeal, the appellant has contested that CIT(A) has erred in confirming Rs. 11,76,838/- as unexplained money u/s 69A of the IT Act, 1961. It is further contested that CIT(A) has erred in confirmed that jewellery weighing 18704.46 gms was allegedly found in excess and hence Rs. 6,57,672/- was added to the income of the appellant u/s 69A. further, CIT(A) has also erred in adding amount of Rs. 41,48,637/- to the income of the appellant as unexplained investment u/s 69A of the IT Act, 1961.
Conclusion- Held that it is a settled position of law that the statement of the assessee is an extremely important piece of evident but it cannot be conclusive and later on the same may be amended. Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Sunil Aggarwal, 64 Taxmann.com 107 held that addition cannot be made merely on the basis of the statement which is subsequently retracted even belatedly. Thus, the bench does not concur with the findings of the ld. CIT(A) and the impugned addition of Rs. 11,76,838/- made on account of alleged excess cash in hand is wrong and against the fact of the case.
