2014 (3) TMI 692 - AT - Income Tax

Addition made by the CIT(A) Records made on loose papers - Search u/s 132 of the Act Held that - The addition of Rs. 17 lacs has been made on the basis of loose paper - no statement of Assessee was recorded at the time of search with respect to the cash receipts - AO had also not examined the purchaser Shri Yogeshbhai Lakhani to whom the said unit was sold and from whom the alleged cash of Rs. 17 lacs is said to have been received by Assessee assessee submitted that the notings were with respect to the tentative discussion held with Yogeshbhai Lakhani for the purchase of units which ultimately did not culminate the decision in COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Versus MAULIKKUMAR K. SHAH 2007 (7) TMI 267 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT followed thus, the addition cannot be made Decided in favour of Assessee.

Summary

Issues:
Validity of assessment order, Addition of Rs. 17,00,000 based on seized paper notings.

Validity of Assessment Order:
The appeal was filed against the CIT(A)'s order for A.Y. 2004-05. A search operation under section 132(2) was conducted, and the Assessee's return of income declared Rs. 32,02,910/-. The assessment under section 153A r.w.s. 143(3) determined total income at Rs. 49,02,910/-. The Assessee challenged the validity of the assessment order before CIT(A), who dismissed the appeal. The Assessee raised grounds regarding the validity of the assessment order, which were dismissed as not pressed. The appeal before ITAT contested the CIT(A)'s decision.

Addition of Rs. 17,00,000 Based on Seized Paper Notings:
During a search, certain documents were seized, including a paper with notings dated 5th March, 2003, indicating cash and cheque receipts. The Assessee explained the notings were from discussions about a property deal with Shri Yogeshbhai Lakhani, which did not materialize as expected. The AO considered the cash receipts unexplained income, leading to the addition of Rs. 17 lacs. CIT(A) upheld this addition, emphasizing the correctness of the seized paper's notings. The Assessee contended the notings were rough and irrelevant, as the deal did not go through, and disclosed amounts already covered the notings. The Assessee argued against the addition, citing lack of corroborative evidence, non-examination of the purchaser, and absence of recorded statements during the search. The DR relied on legal presumptions and the Assessee's failure to rebut them. ITAT, after reviewing the material, observed the lack of tangible evidence supporting the addition and referenced a relevant court decision. Relying on the court's decision, ITAT allowed the Assessee's appeal, concluding that no addition could be made in the case.

In conclusion, the ITAT allowed the Assessee's appeal, overturning the addition of Rs. 17,00,000 made based on the seized paper notings, emphasizing the importance of tangible evidence and the failure to discharge the burden of proof by the revenue.