VISION EXPORTS,MORADABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, MORADABAD

ITA 2361/DEL/2023Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 June 2025AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that a statement recorded under Section 132(4) cannot be the sole basis for an addition without corroborating material. Since the surrendered income was not supported by any incriminating documents found during the search and was subsequently retracted, the additions made by the Assessing Officer were deleted.

What were the facts?

During a search, a partner of Vision Exports, lacking accounting knowledge, surrendered an income of Rs. 9.85 crores due to fear of errors. This surrender was based on loose papers found and was later retracted by another partner who stated all materials were accounted for.

What were the issues?

Whether additions can be made solely based on a retracted statement recorded under Section 132(4) without corroborating evidence found during search? Whether the Assessing Officer erred in making additions without substantiating the alleged undisclosed income with independent material?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 132(4),Section 143(3),Section 68,Section 69B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES: E : NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN & SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, CA;, Shri Mohammad Ammar, CA &, Shri Tariq Nafees, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. DR
Hearing: 23.04.2025Pronounced: 13.06.2025

PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM: This appeal is preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 23.06.2023 of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Lucknow-3 (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. First Appellate Authority or ‘the Ld. FAA’, for short) in Appeal No.CIT(A), Lucknow-3/10314/2018-19 arising out of the appeal before it against the order dated 30.12.2018 passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) by the ACIT, Central Circle, Moradabad (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. AO).

2.

Heard and perused the records. The appellant, a partnership firm consisting of Mr. Danish Ali and Mr. Tariq Ali, engages in the ma

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 132(4)

All 3,819 judgments and leading authorities on Section 132(4) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →