Held, dismissing the appeal of the Revenue   that the Assessing Officer had solely relied upon the statements made by S.K.Gupta   during the course of the search but had overlooked the fact that within a short span of time,  S.K.Gupta had retracted the statements by filing an affidavit and reiterated the statements categorically stating that he had rendered services to the assessee. He had categorically stated that he had rendered service to the assessee and that the assessee had not obtained any bogus accommodation bills from him. The Assessing Officer disbelieved the affidavit as well as the subsequent statement of S.K.Gupta without any justifiable and cogent reason. That apart when the Department relied upon the retracted statement of S.K.Gupta  it ought to have provided an opportunity to the assessee to cross-examine him which was however denied. Thus, the Department was not justified in disallowing the professional expenses of the assessee on account of payment to G and his group of companies. The entire issue was based on appreciation of the materials on record. The Tribunal had scrutinised the materials on record and recorded a finding of fact that there was sufficient evidence to justify payment made by the assessee to S.K Gupta  a consultant of the assessee. In these circumstances, there was no admissible material to deny the claim of expenditure made by the assessee. ( AY.2001-02, 2006-07)b