Loading judgment…
Facts
The Revenue filed two appeals against the CIT(A)'s orders deleting additions made under Section 153C of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessment years under consideration were 2015-16 and 2017-18. The additions were based on seized documents.
Held
The Tribunal held that the seized documents were from a 'third' person, and the presumption of correctness of their contents did not extend to the assessee's case without further substantiation. Therefore, the deletion of additions by the CIT(A) was confirmed.
Key Issues
Whether additions made under Section 153C based on seized documents from a third party are valid without further substantiation?
Sections Cited
153C
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA BENCH, AGRA
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL
ORDER Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member: These Revenue’s twin appeals & 37/Agr/2022 for assessment years 2015-16 & 2017-18, arise against the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-4 [in short the “CIT(A)], Kanpur’s separate orders in Appeal Nos. CIT(A)-IV/KNP/10331/2014-15 and CIT(A)-IV/KNP/12059/2016- 17, both dated 30.05.2022, involving proceedings under section 153C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
Heard both the parties at length. Case files perused.
It emerges during the course of hearing with the able assistance of both the parties that there arises the first and foremost question of correctness of the learned assessing officer’s action proceeding against the assessee under section 153C of the Act thereby making the additions in issue based on seized/incriminating documents (at page 144 onwards). We make it clear that the said seized documents have indeed been reflected in the CIT(Appeals)’s detailed discussion forming part of the case records.
Learned CIT(DR) vehemently argued on the impugned additions that seized documents’ entries ought to have been explained in assessee’s case.
We are of the considered view that once it is an instance of a “third” person other than the searched assessee, presumption of correctness of the contents of his seized material would not be extended herein. We, thus, conclude that once there is no further substantiation by the learned authorities below, learned CIT(Appeals)’s orders deleting the impugned additions deserves to be confirmed in very terms. Ordered accordingly.
No other ground has been raised or pressed.
These Revenue’s twin appeals & 37/Agr/2022 are dismissed. A copy of this common order be placed in respective case files. Order pronounced in the open court on13THFebruary, 2025.