CIT v. DPA Finvest Services Ltd ( 2015) 376 ITR 399 ( Delhi) (HC) and CIT v. Vishal Aggarwal ( 2006) 283 ITR 326 ( Delhi) (HC) ,distinguished .

In CIT v. Harjeev Aggarwal  ( 2016) 241 Taxman 199 / 6 ITR -OL 504 ( Delhi) (HC) observed that oral statements recorded would constitute information only if such information was relatable to the material or evidence found during search and  only then could be used as evidence found during search and only then could be used as evidence  as expressly mandated by virtue of the explanation to section 132(4) of the Act. A contrary view has been taken by the Kerala High Court in CIT v. Hotel Meriya ( 2011) 332 ITR 537 ( Ker) (HC) to the effect that oral evidence would be admissible for the purpose of block assessment also and that the Explanation to section 132(4) permits recording of statement on oath for all purposes connected with any proceedings under the Act. In view  of the  conflict and divergence , having recorded the prima facie reservation on the view expressed on “ books of account “ and on “ oral statement “ not being evidence found , the question of interpretation of the term “ undisclosed income” for the purpose of block assessment was to be referred to a larger bench . [BP. 1-4-1989 to 15-1-2000 ]