← All Phrases

“loose papers”

Search & SeizureSection 132Section 1322,159 judgments

The decision most relied on for loose papers is Society v. UOI (394 ITR 220), cited in 493 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on loose papers

Society v. UOI
394 ITR 220 · 2017 · Supreme Court
493
citing judgments

Uncorroborated loose papers or documents found during a search operation have no evidentiary value and cannot be the sole basis for determining undisclosed income. Additions based on such material require independent evidence to establish trustworthiness and a direct link to the assessee.

CBI v. V.C. Shukla
3 SCC 410 · 1998 · Supreme Court
442
citing judgments

Loose sheets of paper, excel sheets, or diaries, often referred to as 'dumb documents,' are wholly irrelevant as evidence and not admissible under Section 34 of the Evidence Act if they lack evidentiary value. Additions to income cannot be made solely based on such documents without corroborating, reliable, and admissible evidence supported by other circumstances.

CIT v. Nikunj Exim Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.
372 ITR 619 · 2015 · High Court
391
citing judgments

Transactions defying human probability cannot be applied to isolated purchases if sales are accepted as genuine, and purchases cannot be disallowed without considering the entire transaction and documentary evidence. Failure to produce parties in an assessment proceeding may not be fatal to the assessee.

DCIT v. Sunil Kumar Sharma
159 Taxmann.com 179 · 2024 · High Court
269
citing judgments

Loose sheets of paper containing jottings, not shown to be part of regularly maintained books of accounts, do not constitute incriminating material for initiating assessment under section 153C. The satisfaction note required for 153C proceedings must specify the assessment year to which the alleged incriminating material belongs.

Common Cause v. Union of India
77 Taxmann.com 245 · 2017 · Supreme Court
267
citing judgments

Additions under the Income Tax Act cannot be made solely based on entries in loose sheets, dumb documents, or mere sworn statements without independent, reliable, and cogent corroborating evidence. Uncorroborated loose papers are not admissible evidence on their own, even if the original context was criminal investigation.

CIT v. Girish Chaudhary
296 ITR 619 · 2008 · High Court
175
citing judgments

Additions to income cannot be made solely based on "dumb documents" or vague loose papers seized during a search that merely indicate rates without specific corroborative material linking them to the assessee's unaccounted transactions. The presumption under Section 292C may not apply to such documents.

Principal Commissioner Income Tax, Central-2 v. Umesh Ishrani
108 Taxmann.com 437 · 2019 · High Court
168
citing judgments

An addition to income cannot be made solely based on entries in loose papers found during a search without conducting any independent inquiry or verification from the alleged seller or developer. Reliance solely on digital records without corroborative evidence is insufficient for an addition.

CIT v. Maulikkumar K. Shah
307 ITR 137 · 2008 · High Court
166
citing judgments

Additions on account of on-money receipts cannot be justified solely based on loose papers or 'sauda-chithis' without evidence of actual payment or a clear indication of a completed transaction within those documents.

Judgments citing loose papers

Gopal Krishna S Revankar, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax - Circle 19(2) (Now Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 22(3)), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1164/MUM/2018[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Apr 2023AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 1164/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2002-03) Gopal Krishna S. Revankar बिधम/ Acit, Circle-19(2) (Now Lotus House, Off Andheri- Acit-22(3) Vs. Kurla Road, Sakinaka, Piramal Chambers, Andheri (E), Mumbai- Lalbaugh, Mumbai. 400072. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaapr4742C (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Mitesh Mehta Revenue By: Shri Sanjeev Ranjan (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 24/01/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/04/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-34, Mumbai Dated 21.12.2017 For Assessment Year 2002-03. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under: - “1. The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Not Realizing The Fact That The Appellant Has Already Added Rs. 10,43,700/- To Its Total Income After Considering Rs.7,65,000/- From Meenakshi Bhavan & Other Receipts In The Rough Cash Book & Loose Papers Found During The Survey Action On The Assessee On 28.2.2002. 2. The Learned Cit (A) Erred In Making Addition Of Rs. 7,70,536/- On Account Of Unexplained Cash Found During The Survey. This Amounts To Taxing The Same Amount Twice. 3. The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Making Addition Of Rs. 7,65,000/- On Account Of Unaccounted Receipts From Meenakshi Bhavan Resulting Into Taxing The Same Income Three Times.

For Appellant: Shri Mitesh MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Ranjan (Sr. AR)
Section 133A

total income after considering Rs.7,65,000/- from Meenakshi Bhavan and other receipts in the rough cash book and loose papers found during the survey action on the assessee on 28.2.2002. 2. The learned CIT (A) erred in making addition of Rs. 7,70,536/- on account of unexplained cash ... hereinafter “the Act”) [at the assessee’s office premises at Lotus House]. And during the course of survey proceedings, some rough cash book and loose papers were found and the statement of 4 A.Y. 2002-03 Gopal Krishna S. Revankar Smt. Anagha Vazandar, the General Manager of the concerns