Megha Kalpesh Shah , Mumbai vs Dcit -Cc-8(1) , Mumbai on 17 November, 2021
b) Similar ratio has been laid down in the cases of PCIT vs Best Infrastructure (India)
Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. (supra)(Del) ,CIT v. Harjeev Aggarwal (Del)(Supra), PKSS
Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT and vice-versa (Mum ITAT) (supra), Geetanjali
Space Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT (supra)
26.2. Therefore, on this count also, we are not in agreement with the conclusion
drawn by the Ld. CIT(A). In our considered view, the statement recorded under
section 132(4) of the Act can not be considered as incriminating material found in
the course of search. This is an undisputed position of law that in case of unabated
assessment year, no addition can be made in absence of any incriminating materials
found during the course of search. The case of the assessee is squarely covered by
series of decisions which are dealt with as under: