SH VIKAS GUTGUTIA,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

order of the learned CIT(A) in deleting the addition on this issue. We find merit in the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the assessee that whenever any document is found and seized during the course of search, the same has to be accepted in toto or be rejected in toto and the same cannot be partly accepted and partly rejected. A perusal of the material available on record shows that the assessee has already declared profit of Rs.79,65,515/- on account of new business in the return of income, although, the assessee had disclosed a sum of Rs.1,10,00,000/- on the ground that the differences were due to certain adjustment of mandi creditors. Further, the learned CIT(A) had already sustained an amount of Rs.30,34,485/- being difference between the amount disclosed of Rs.1,10,00,000/- and the ultimate surrender of Rs.79,65,515/-. We, therefore, find merit in the arguments of the learned counsel for the assessee that since, the amount of Rs.79,65,515/- has already been offered to tax in the return of income on account of handicraft business, therefore, the addition of Rs.50,30,610/- again on the basis of same Annexure A-5 will amount to double addition. We, therefore, do not find any infirmity in the order of the learned CIT(A) in deleting the addition. Accordingly, the ground of appeal no. 5, raised by the Revenue is dismissed.