No addition can be made  on Absence of Corroborative and Supporting Evidence regarding Satakat found during survey of Third Party Business Premises: ITAT [Read Order]

The  Surat bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has recently held that no addition could  be made  on absence of corroborative and supporting evidence regarding satakat found during  survey of third party business premises

When a search action was conducted on the premises of one Vasudev Goplani, Advocate, wherein unsigned satakat in the name of assessee,   Mukesh Agarwal and purchases of immovable property was found. 

On the said satakat the consideration of property was allegedly recorded at Rs.59 lakhs, however, the sale consideration shown by assessee in the sale deed was only Rs.21,69,000/-. The assessee was having ½ share in the said property. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer after recording the reasons for reopening that income of assessee escaped assessment, the case of assessee was reopened.

Further, without giving an opportunity of cross examining either lawyer or party mentioned in satakhat to prove genuineness of such satakhat, AO made addition while processing the assessment .

Aggrieved by the assessment order assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A) who confirmed the addition.Further the assessee filed second appeal before the tribunal.

Counsel for the assessee submitted that during assessment, the assessing officer neither provided the copy of alleged satakat found during the survey action carried out in business premises of Vasudev Goplani, Advocate nor called him for cross-examination.

The purchaser of the property was also not called for ascertaining the truth.Also the document was found at the premises of a third-party and the document did  not bear the signature or acknowledgement of assessee.

Counsel for the revenue submitted that the details mentioned on such satakat exactly matched with the particulars of the payment made to assessee as mentioned on the conveyance deed of immovable property sold by assessee.

The tribunal observed that the Assessing Officer solely relied upon the documents found at the business premises of third-party. The Assessing Officer neither called upon Vasudev Goplani, Advocate during re-assessment proceedings nor made any independent investigation on fact from the purchasers namely Niral Apoorva Bhatu.

Thus  the AO made the addition in absence of corroborative and supporting evidence.

Therefore the  single member bench of Pawan Singh, (Judicial Member)  deleted the addition made  by the lower Authority.

Jaikishan Goel, appeared for the assessee . Vinod Kumar, appeared for the revenue.

To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates