← All Phrases

“investigation wing”

ReassessmentSection 147Section 14712,584 judgments

The decision most relied on for investigation wing is PCIT v. RMG Polyvinyl (I) Ltd. (396 ITR 5), cited in 272 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on investigation wing

PCIT v. RMG Polyvinyl (I) Ltd.
396 ITR 5 · 2017 · High Court
272
citing judgments

Reassessment based solely on information from the Investigation Wing, without the Assessing Officer conducting further inquiry or demonstrating an independent application of mind, is unjustified and invalid.

109 TTJ 700 (Del) SMC Share Brokers Ltd. v. DCIT
293 ITR 43 · 2007 · High Court
264
citing judgments

Where an assessment order is merely a copy-paste of observations from an investigation wing's appraisal report without independent verification, it is not a valid basis for making additions to income.

Sarthak Securities Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO
329 ITR 110 · 2010 · High Court
217
citing judgments

Reassessment proceedings under Section 147 are invalid if the Assessing Officer records satisfaction based on borrowed satisfaction or information without independently applying their mind and forming their own 'reason to believe' that income has escaped assessment. The AO must arrive at an independent conclusion, not merely act on a report from an investigation wing without due diligence.

ITO, 19(3) (4) Mumbai v. Shamim M Bharwani
69 Taxmann.com 65 · 2016 · Reported
142
citing judgments

Long Term Capital Gains (LTCG) from penny stock transactions are liable to be treated as bogus and added back under Section 68 as unexplained cash credits, especially when evidence suggests the involvement of entry operators providing accommodation entries.

1. Harikishan S. Virmani v. DCIT
394 ITR 146 · 2017 · High Court
97
citing judgments

Reassessment proceedings under section 147 cannot be initiated by the Assessing Officer based on borrowed satisfaction, vague information from the Investigation Wing, or incorrect jurisdictional facts without independent application of mind. Reopening beyond four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, especially where an original assessment was completed under section 143(3), requires specific conditions relating to the assessee's failure to disclose material facts.

ITO v. Purushottam Das Bangur
224 ITR 362 · 1997 · Supreme Court
90
citing judgments

Information received from the investigation wing constitutes valid 'reason to believe' for initiating reassessment proceedings under Sections 147/148, provided the Assessing Officer applies their mind to the material and does not act mechanically. Prompt issuance of a notice based on such information does not automatically imply a lack of due diligence or borrowed satisfaction.

AGR Investment v. Additional Commissioner
197 Taxmann 177 · 2011 · High Court
81
citing judgments

A reassessment under Section 147/148 is valid if initiated based on specific, non-vague information, even from an investigation wing, provided the Assessing Officer applies independent mind to form a 'reason to believe' that income has escaped assessment.

56 (Guj.) (para 6) v. Aaspas Multimedia Ltd. v. Dy. CIT
83 Taxmann.com 82 · 2017 · High Court
78
citing judgments

Information received from the Investigation Wing, identifying the assessee as a beneficiary of accommodation entries through share application from a third party, constitutes valid tangible material and 'reasons to believe' for initiating reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act.

Judgments citing investigation wing

Ns Healthcare Services Private Limited, Vijayawada vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Vijayawada

In the results, appeals filed by the revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 146/VIZ/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam18 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Veeravalli Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

Section 133Section 142(1)Section 148Section 148A

under section 133(A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘Act’) was conducted in the case of the assessee on 11.03.2022 by investigation wing. The case then centralized by taking approval from the appropriate authorities. During the course of survey, it was noticed that assessee maintains separate cash

Ns Healthcare Services Private Limited, Vijayawada vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Vijayawada

In the results, appeals filed by the revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 145/VIZ/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam18 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Veeravalli Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

Section 133Section 142(1)Section 148Section 148A

under section 133(A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘Act’) was conducted in the case of the assessee on 11.03.2022 by investigation wing. The case then centralized by taking approval from the appropriate authorities. During the course of survey, it was noticed that assessee maintains separate cash

Shri Amit Jayantilal Doshi, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 19(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 2950/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Reepal Tralshawala, ARFor Respondent: Shri Aditya Rai (Sr. DR)
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 69C

jewellery business who disclosed income of Rs 18,88,000/-in the original return filed. Subsequently, information was received by the AO from the Investigation wing of the department that the assessee was a beneficiary of accommodation entry. Accordingly, notice under section 148A(b) of the Act was issued

ITO 5(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Mokxa Diamond Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue bearing ITA No

ITA 2006/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Bharat KumarFor Respondent: Shri Annavaram Kosuri SR.AR
Section 133(6)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 68Section 69C

sham arrangement from the documentary evidence at hand. The entire case of the Ld. A.O. rests on the information received from the Investigation Wing. The Ld. A.O. has neither reproduced the statement of the directors of M/s Anjani Diam Pvt. Ltd. nor has he highlighted the part wherein ... advance receipts against sales of goods from M/s Anjani Diam Pvt Ltd. However, the credible information is available with the department collected by the Investigation Wing of the Department that the Mis Anjani Diam Pvt. Ltd. havingno real business and was engaged in providing accommodation entry in the lieu

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Sea Point Trading & Builders Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1731/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy, Judical Member & Shri Manish Agarwalasst. Commissioner Of M/S. Sea Point Trading & Income Tax, Builders Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle-2, Vs. B-4/43, 2Nd Floor, New Delhi. Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi-110029. Pan: Aabcs0741C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv., Shri Somil Agarwal, Adv. & Shri Deepesh Garg, Adv. Department By Shri Virender Kumar Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 07/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 18/06/2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-23, New Delhi [Ld. Cit(A), In Short], Dt. 29.01.2026 In Appeal No. 16/2015-16 For Assessment Year 2012-13 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act, In Short). 2. The Revenue Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Order Of Ld. Cit(A) Is Not Correct In Law & On Facts. 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Laws In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.6,35,00,000/- Made By Ao On Account Of Unexplained Cash Credit U/S 68 Of The Act Received From M/S Manan Merchandise Pvt. Ltd.”

Section 127Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

credited in the accounts of MMPL, though deposited through proper banking channels, were not received from these companies/persons and the AO, or the Investigation Wing which conducted the initial and post-search investigations/enquiries which formed basis for reopening of assessment and reassessment, has not carried out any enquiry beyond issue

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Belisma Buildcon Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1728/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jun 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms.Madhumita Roy & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Acit, Vs M/S. Belisma Buildcon Central Circle-2, Pvt.Ltd.,77, Ss House, Sector-44, New Delhi Gurgaon, Haryana-122003. Pan-Aadcb9647C Appellant Respondent Appellant By Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv., Shri Somil Agarwal, Adv. & Shri Deepesh Garg, Adv. Respondent By Shri Virender Kumar Singh, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 07.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 18.06.2025 Order

Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

credited in the accounts of OVPL, though deposited through proper banking channels, were not received from these companies/persons and the AO, or the Investigation Wing which conducted the initial and post-search investigations/enquiries which formed basis for reopening of assessment and reassessment, has not carried out any enquiry beyond issue

M/S. Super Shiv Shakti Minchem Pvt. Ltd., Jodhpur vs. ITO, Ward-3, Bhilwara

In the result, both the above appeals filed by the Assessee are dismissed

ITA 21/JODH/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur17 Jun 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Goutam Chand Baid, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Karni Dan, Addl. CIT (Sr. D.R)
Section 147Section 148Section 6Section 68Section 69C

that the reasons recorded by the AO for initiating proceedings under section 147 were vague, mechanical, and based entirely on information received from the Investigation Wing, without any application of mind or independent verification. It was submitted that the AO merely reproduced the content of the letter from the DDIT ... commission was actually paid. The alleged figure of Rs. 1,17,900/- was presumptive and based on the generic modus operandi recorded by the Investigation Wing. 8. On the other hand, the Revenue relied upon the findings of the AO and the CIT(A), who placed significant emphasis

M/S. Super Shiv Shakti Minchem Pvt. Ltd., Jodhpur vs. ITO, Ward-3, Bhilwara

In the result, both the above appeals filed by the Assessee are dismissed

ITA 20/JODH/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur17 Jun 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Goutam Chand Baid, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Karni Dan, Addl. CIT (Sr. D.R)
Section 147Section 148Section 6Section 68Section 69C

that the reasons recorded by the AO for initiating proceedings under section 147 were vague, mechanical, and based entirely on information received from the Investigation Wing, without any application of mind or independent verification. It was submitted that the AO merely reproduced the content of the letter from the DDIT ... commission was actually paid. The alleged figure of Rs. 1,17,900/- was presumptive and based on the generic modus operandi recorded by the Investigation Wing. 8. On the other hand, the Revenue relied upon the findings of the AO and the CIT(A), who placed significant emphasis

Sridhar Kumari, Kanchipuram vs. ACIT, Ncc-22(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 398/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.398/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 Sridhar Kumari, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of No. 12-B, First Street, Ellappa Nagar, Income Tax, Kanchipuram 631 502. Non Corporate Circle 22(1), (Tbm), Chennai. [Pan:Anppk2206G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Y. Sridhar, Fca ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Deeptha, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 30.04.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 17.06.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi:

For Appellant: Shri Y. Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Ms. Deeptha, Addl. CIT
Section 148Section 148ASection 151

assessee objected to the reopening notice stating that the additional income declared vide return of income demonstrates that all the discrepancies highlighted by the Investigation Wing, including the issue under consideration. The Assessing Officer did not accept the submissions of the assessee and accordingly, he proceeded to add the said

Asha Himmat Bhadra, Mumbai vs. DCIT Circle 32(1), Mumbai Erstwhile Income Tax Officer-25(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2154/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jun 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain(Jm) & Shri Prabhash Shankar(Am) Asha Himmat Bhadra Dcit Circle 32(1) 401 Beach Apartment Kautilya Bhavan Balraj Sahani Road Vs. Bandra Kurla Opp. Novotel Hotel Complex, Bandra-E Juhu, Mumbai-400 049. Mumbai-40 0051. Pan : Aabpb7076J Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Aditya RaiFor Respondent: Shri Vimal Punmiya
Section 68

determined, at recognized stock exchange, which is not in control of assessee. However, just because the Income Tax Department got the information from the Investigation Wing that M/s. Splash Media Ltd. is a penny stock, in her view it does not mean that the assessee has indulged into misappropriation ... scrip of M/s. Splash Media & Infra Ltd. The General Manager, Investigation Department of SEBI vide report dated 11.10.2017 have submitted the report of the Investigation Wing and also to the ACIT, Central Circle -4(4), Mumbai that the investigation of SEBI did not find violation of provisions of the SEBI

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 2 Kolkata vs. Seaside Projects Pvt Ltd

ITAT/66/2025HC Calcutta16 Jun 2025

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Chief Justice T.S Sivagnanam

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 260A

raised by the assessee before the learned Tribunal and found favour of the learned Tribunal is the ground that the information received from the investigation wing are certain general information and that the assessing officer did not investigate on his own and record satisfaction as regards the escapement of income

DCIT, Circle-1, Bathinda vs. Dmr Builders Pvt Ltd, Bathinda

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed being devoid of merits

ITA 293/ASR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar16 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Hybrid Hearing) I.T.A. Nos. 292 & 293/Asr/2024 Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2017-18

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250(6)

contractor which has come to fore: Relevant part of assessee written submission ( Reproduced ) a. In the pre search investigation, it was found by the investigation wing that many of these entities either do not exist at the given address or do not have the infrastructure to provide service on such

DCIT, Circle-1, Bathinda vs. Dmr Builders Pvt Ltd, Bathinda

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed being devoid of merits

ITA 292/ASR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar16 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Hybrid Hearing) I.T.A. Nos. 292 & 293/Asr/2024 Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2017-18

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250(6)

contractor which has come to fore: Relevant part of assessee written submission ( Reproduced ) a. In the pre search investigation, it was found by the investigation wing that many of these entities either do not exist at the given address or do not have the infrastructure to provide service on such

Upenkumar Amrutji Vihol, Vadodara vs. The ITO, Ward-3(1)(2)(Previously ITO, Ward-1, Anand), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 556/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Manan Agrawal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sher Singh, CIT-DR & Shri Hargovind
Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 271FSection 69A

opening the account and the impugned amount did not actually belonged to him. Further, it is on record that enquires carried out by Investigation Wing revealed that various accounts were opened in the M/s. Shri Renuka Mata Multi State Urban Co-operative Credit Society Ltd. and huge cash deposits were ... under the knowledge of the account holders on payment of commission. 6.4 Given the above modus operandi, as established by the enquiry of the Investigation wing, the onus was on the appellant either to come out with the actual beneficiary of the money deposited in the account maintained

Upenkumar Amrutji Vihol, Vadodara vs. The ITO, Ward-3(1)(2)(Previously ITO, Ward-1, Anand), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 555/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Manan Agrawal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sher Singh, CIT-DR & Shri Hargovind
Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 271FSection 69A

opening the account and the impugned amount did not actually belonged to him. Further, it is on record that enquires carried out by Investigation Wing revealed that various accounts were opened in the M/s. Shri Renuka Mata Multi State Urban Co-operative Credit Society Ltd. and huge cash deposits were ... under the knowledge of the account holders on payment of commission. 6.4 Given the above modus operandi, as established by the enquiry of the Investigation wing, the onus was on the appellant either to come out with the actual beneficiary of the money deposited in the account maintained

Upenkumar Amrutji Vihol, Vadodara vs. The ITO, Ward-3(1)(2), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 554/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Manan Agrawal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sher Singh, CIT-DR & Shri Hargovind
Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 271FSection 69A

opening the account and the impugned amount did not actually belonged to him. Further, it is on record that enquires carried out by Investigation Wing revealed that various accounts were opened in the M/s. Shri Renuka Mata Multi State Urban Co-operative Credit Society Ltd. and huge cash deposits were ... under the knowledge of the account holders on payment of commission. 6.4 Given the above modus operandi, as established by the enquiry of the Investigation wing, the onus was on the appellant either to come out with the actual beneficiary of the money deposited in the account maintained

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Rithwik Projects Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 533/HYD/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Jun 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.533/Hyd/2020 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12) Acit Vs. Rithwik Projects (P) Ltd Central Circle 2(2) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aabcr5748L (Appellant) (Respondent) राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Smt. U Mini Chandran, Cit(Dr) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 22/04/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 16P/06/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Raothis Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 27/07/2020 Of The Learned Cit (A)-12, Hyderabad, Relating To A.Y.2011-12. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Learned Cit (A) Erred Boith In Law & On Facts Of The Case. 2. The Learned Cit (A) Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.5,00,00,000/- Towards Amount Received From M/S. Pacl India Ltd Stating That The Amount Received Was Towards Works Contract & The Assessee Had Offered Reasonable

For Appellant: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: Smt. U Mini Chandran, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

133A of the Act. Therefore, the addition made by the Assessing Officer on the basis of the statement of 3rd party recorded by the Investigation Wing, Kolkata is not sustainable in absence of any corroborative evidence to show that the transaction recorded by the assessee is in the books

Santanu Roy Income Tax Officer Ward 10(2), Kolkata vs. Bruck Pharma Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, both appeals of the revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 372/KOL/2025[2022-23]Status: FixedITAT Kolkata16 Jun 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RAKESH MISHRA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Priyavrat Gupta, ARFor Respondent: Shri P.N.Barnwal, CIT-DR

paper. The ld. CIT(A), NFAC has deleted the addition by holding that the Assessing Officer has merely relied upon the information provided by Investigation Wing. The ld. CIT(A) has also mentioned that there is gross violation of principle of natural justice. When there is violation of principle

Santanu Roy, Income Tax Officr Ward 10(2), Kolkata vs. Bruck Pharma Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, both appeals of the revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 371/KOL/2025[2013-14]Status: FixedITAT Kolkata16 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RAKESH MISHRA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Priyavrat Gupta, ARFor Respondent: Shri P.N.Barnwal, CIT-DR

paper. The ld. CIT(A), NFAC has deleted the addition by holding that the Assessing Officer has merely relied upon the information provided by Investigation Wing. The ld. CIT(A) has also mentioned that there is gross violation of principle of natural justice. When there is violation of principle

Aadinath Merchandise Private Ltd, Gujarat vs. DCIT Central Circle -5(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2935/MUM/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankaraadinath Merchandise V/S. Deputy Commissioner Of Private Ltd., 1St Floor, Sy-1105 Income Tax, Central Circle बनाम To 1107, Office No. 102, Tulsi – 5(2), Kautilyabhavan, Building, Somnathmahadevni Bandrakurla Complex, Sheri Haripura, Mahidharpura, Bandra (East), Mumbai Surat, Gujarat – 395 003 400051, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaoca4521H Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Gandhi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav (CIT DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 234ASection 270ASection 271A

erred in confirming the action of Ld AO of estimating commission income by relying on the reports of the Investigation Wing and the statement recorded of the third-party without affording an opportunity of cross examination. 9. On the facts and circumstances of the case