From a reading of Section 133A, it is apparent that it does not mandate that any statement recorded u/s 133A of the Act would have evidentiary value. In the High Court’s view, for a statement to have evidentiary value, the survey officer should have been authorised to administer oath and to record sworn statement. This would also be apparent from Section 132(4) of the Act. From the perusal of section 132(4), it is apparent that while Section 132(4) of the Act specifically authorizes an officer to examine a person on oath, Section 133A does not permit the same;
Hon’able Supreme Court of India, Different High Courts and Tribunal are having considerate view that in absence of corroborated evidence a confession/ admission by way of statement could not attain evidentry value in the eyes of law. It is settled that if the department willing to use statement, department has to prove it with other evidences and assessee is free to prove it contrary/against the department. In my opinion statement gives only clue to prepare or made up case against the assesee for example a cup of tea required raw tea, milk and sugar but without fire all these things cannot cocked good tea. Raw tea can leave its flavor, and colour but not aroma with fresh water and will take long time and will not provide tea satisfaction. In the same way statement is a helping verb, which required verb (corroborative evidence) to complete sentence. Statement can utilize by the clever assessee in his favour because statement is interpretable.