9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 1694X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l year 2004-05. In response to the notice issued under section 153A, the assessee has filed returns of income for the assessment years 2000-01, 2001- 02 and 2003-04 as under : A.Y. Returned income Date of filing 2000-01 6,22,412 27.11.2006 2001-02 6,97,380 -do- 2003-04 7,71,780 -do- 2.1. While completing the assessment, the A.O. observed from the seized material that the assessee had made huge investments in M/s. Sujana Metal Products Limited and was receiving interest income on lease deposits and sources for this investments have not been explained properly and hence, the same are to be treated as unaccounted income and brought to tax for the assessment years 2000-01, 2001-02 and 2003-04 as mentioned below : A.Y. Principal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e, the additions towards unaccounted investment for all the three assessment years under consideration may please be deleted". The assessee has relied upon the case law of Atul Kumar Jain vs. DCIT 1999 (064) TTJ 0786 TDEL. No addition could be made on the basis of figures on a seized paper presuming them to be coded figures without bringing any corroborative material evidence in support thereof and it cannot form the basis for determining undisclosed income relating to sale proceeds of property. Held, that - The seized paper being not corroborated by any independent evidence cannot be considered as a document in proof of investment in house property and accordingly this paper is liable to be ignored. Having regard to all the facts and circu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion arising under s. 132(4A) is available to Revenue only for the limited purpose of search and seizure and cannot override the provisions of section 69. Hence, no addition can be sustained on the basis of above material. Conclusion : Additions could not be made on the basis of certain seized loose sheets and torn papers as the entries found thereon were mere estimates and no purchase or sale of properties noted down had actually taken place. Income from undisclosed sources- Addition u/s 69-Additions could not be made on the basis of loose sheet and tom papers found during raid as the entries found thereon are said to be mere estimates and there is no evidence that purchase and sale of properties as noted down had actually taken plac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arned CIT(A) erred in coming to conclusion that the figures in the seized documents have not been identified with any material facts, assets etc., though the asset is existing in the form of unaccounted investment. 3. The learned CIT(A) erred in allowing the appeal on the ground that the document found is a dumb document, without considering the corroborative information that was available in the compact disc. 4. Any other ground that may be urged at the time of hearing." 6. The learned D.R. on the other hand relied on the Order of the Assessing Officer. 7. Grounds No. 1 and 4 are general in nature and therefore, it needs no adjudication. The learned Counsel for the assessee, Shri M.V. Joshi filed a loose sheet found during the se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o, no addition can be made solely on the basis of a notebook or loose sheets which are dumb documents and the Assessing Off icer is duty bound to bring on record corroborative material to show that the assessee has concealed the income. Being so, in our opinion, deletion of addition by the CIT(A) is justified and we confirm the order of the CIT(A)". 7. In the case of ACIT, Circle 2 (2), Hyderabad vs. Shri Gyan Kumar Agarwal, Hyderabad in IT(SS)A.No.3/Hyd/2013 and in C.O.25/Hyd/2013 in IT(SS)A.No.3/Hyd/2013 the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal held as under : 9. ". . . .In the earlier order, the Tribunal clearly observed that the two documents on which reliance was placed in the earlier proceedings were only dumb documents and cannot b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... und is a dumb document and the A.O. without considering the corroborative information which was available in the compact disc has added the amounts. The amounts added have already been reflected in the books of M/s. Sujana Metal Products Ltd for the respective financial years relevant to the assessment year. The seized material being not corroborated by any independent evidence, cannot be considered as a document in proof of unaccounted investment and hence, to be deleted. In the present case, a single paper which is seized A/SUIC/B6/18 is a dumb material found during the search. Therefore, we dismiss the appeals of the Revenue.
9. In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 03.12.2013. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
