For several months, this statement was not retracted. It was only on 26.9.07, during the course of the assessment proceedings that the assessee wrote a letter retracting the statement. There is some discrepancy about the date of the letter whether it was written on 26.9.07 or on 26.9.06. Be that it it may, the fact remains that initial statement was not retracted for several months. In his retraction statement, the assessee made out a ground that the search had started at 8.30 in the morning and ended on the next day and thus it continued for a period of nearly 24 hours. In short, he suggested mental harassment and fatigue for having made such a disclosure. He did not suggest any undue pressure or allurement.
It is noteworthy that quite apart from such statement dated 19.1.06, at the time of search, the assessee had made yet another confessional statement on 28th March 2006. He had never referred to such a statement in his retraction. He did not offer any explanation why quite apart from the statement made at the time of search operation, he had two months later repeated his offer. The authorities have further recorded that both the statements were made in presence of the Chartered Accountant of the assessee. In addition to such circumstances, the Commissioner (Appeals) noted that the appellant was not maintaining personal books of accounts. The assessee’s contention was that source of investment in furniture and fixtures was withdrawal from the firm, but the books of accounts of the firm were rejected under section 145 of the Act due to specific defects found by the Assessing Officer.
In short, the Revenue authorities and the Tribunal on the basis of evidence on record came to the conclusion that the addition of Rs.50 lacs was justified.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
AT AHMEDABAD
Tax Appeal No.386 of 2012
SUDHARSHAN P AMIN
Vs
ASSTT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
Dated: January 8, 2013
Paid content
Become a Premium Member, or log in if you are already a Premium member.
