Vineet Gupta Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi)
ITAT Delhi held that addition under section 69A r.w.s. cannot be sustained merely on the basis of the statement. There has to be some material corroborating the content of the statements. Accordingly, appeal allowed and addition deleted.
Facts- A search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Act was carried out at the premise of Mohit Garg and bothers on 25-11-2016 and during the course of search certain documents belonging to the assessee were sized.
The assessee has filed the return of income declaring total income of Rs 6,55,060/- on 29-06-2017 for the A.Y.2017-18. A notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued and another notice u/s 142(1) of the Act was issued with questionnaire. The AR of the assessee has attended the proceedings and furnished certain details. The AO has made the addition of Rs 17,00,000/-on account of unexplained income u/s 69 r.w.s 115 BBE of the Act and Rs 60,00,000/- on account of the earned commission from the Rajeev Singh Kushwaha u/s 69A r.w.s 115BBE of the Act.
CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal. Being aggrieved, the present appeal is filed.
Conclusion- It is an undisputed fact that the statement recorded under section 132(4) of the Act has better evidentiary value but it is also settled position of law that addition cannot be sustained merely on the basis of the statement. There has to be some material corroborating the content of the statements.
