Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2016 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (9) TMI 1489 - AT - Income TaxAddition based on loose papers as found at the time of search operation - corroborative and concrete evidence against the assessee - Held that:- No search was carried out in the premises of Shri Pukhraj Soni and no loose paper/ hundi/ documents/ promissory note/ cash book or cash flow statement were found or seized, which could prove the movement of cash to & fro between Shri Pukhraj Soni & Shri Nilesh Ajmera with respect to interest and loans. We find that the AO failed to bring on record any corroborative and concrete evidence against the assessee which could prove that the assessee has advanced money to Shri Nilesh Ajmera. The inference of the AO that the assessee has advanced the money is merely based on suspicion, surmises and conjectures and there was no material to support the conclusion of the AO that the assessee has advanced the money. We derive support from the decision in the case of Dhakeshwari Cotton Mill Pvt.Ltd. vs. CIT, [1954 (10) TMI 12 - SUPREME COURT], wherein it was held that while making an assessment there must be something more than the bare suspicion to support the assessment. In another case of K.P. Varghese vs. ITO, [1981 (9) TMI 1 - SUPREME COURT] has held that mere seizure of note books of documents at the personal residence of an employee would not conclude the issue against the employer company that the on money has been received by the employer company. The onus of proving the charging of on money lies on the Revenue. - Decided in favour of assessee
|