← All Phrases

“evidentiary value”

Natural JusticeEvidenceEvidence5,387 judgments

The decision most relied on for evidentiary value is Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT (125 ITR 713), cited in 962 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on evidentiary value

Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT
125 ITR 713 · 1980 · Supreme Court
962
citing judgments

Adverse material or evidence collected by the Assessing Officer behind the assessee's back, without providing it to the assessee or affording an opportunity for cross-examination, has no evidentiary value and cannot be relied upon to make additions.

Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. v. State of Kerala
91 ITR 18 · 1973 · Supreme Court
666
citing judgments

Admissions, whether made through entries in account books or statements, are important pieces of evidence but are not conclusive. An assessee has the right to demonstrate that an admission made by them is incorrect or can be retracted.

CIT v. S. Khader Khan Son
352 ITR 480 · 2013 · Supreme Court
581
citing judgments

Statements recorded during a survey under Section 133A do not have evidentiary value as Section 133A does not empower examination on oath. Consequently, additions to income cannot be made solely based on such uncorroborated statements without other credible evidence.

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.

CIT v. S. Khader Khan Son
300 ITR 157 · 2008 · High Court
452
citing judgments

A statement recorded under duress during a survey, if subsequently retracted, has no evidentiary value and cannot be the sole basis for an income-tax assessment; the assessment should instead rely on audited accounts.

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.

Omar Salay Mohamed Sait v. CIT
37 ITR 151 · 1959 · Supreme Court
372
citing judgments

An income tax assessment or addition cannot be made based solely on suspicion, surmises, or conjectures. The income tax department requires evidence or material to justify an addition, as suspicion, however strong, does not constitute proof.

CIT v. R. Nalini Devi ITTA 232 of 2013 (A. P)
294 ITR 49 · 2007 · Supreme Court
299
citing judgments

Additions to income cannot be made solely based on uncorroborated third-party statements, documents, or loose sheets seized during a search, and such evidence requires the assessee to be provided with an opportunity for cross-examination.

Judgments citing evidentiary value

ACIT Central Circle- 2(3), Hyderabad vs. Dcs Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 445/HYD/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad14 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Asstt. C. I. T. Vs. Dcs Limited Central Circle 2(4) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aaacd7127J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Advocate Mohd Afzal Revenue By: Shri Kprr Murthy,Dr Date Of Hearing: 06/03/2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 14/03/2023 Order Per R.K. Panda, A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 22.07.2021 Of The Learned Cit (A)-12, Hyderabad, Relating To A.Y.2017-18. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Company Engaged In The Business Of Civil & Mining Contract. It Filed Its Return Of Income U/S 139(1) Of The Income Tax Act On 27.10.2017 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.3,92,02,560/-. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny Under Cass & Statutory Notices U/S 143(2) & 142(1) Were Issued & Served On The Assessee To Which The A.R Of The Assessee Appeared Before The Assessing Officer From Time To Time & Filed The Requisite Details. Page 1 Of 13

For Appellant: Advocate Mohd AfzalFor Respondent: Shri KPRR Murthy,DR
Section 132Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(2)

Khadan Khan Son (2012) 25 Taxmann.com 413 (S.C) he submitted that the statement recorded u/s 133A of the Act on oath has no evidentiary value and therefore, any addition made solely on the basis of the statement recorded u/s 133A cannot be sustained. Relying on various other decisions, he submitted ... Khadar Khan Son (2008) 300 ITR 157 (Mad), while holding that the statement elicited during the survey operation has no evidentiary value has observed as under: "An admission is extremely an important piece of evidence but it cannot be said that it is conclusive; and it is open

ITO, Ward-3(1), Asansol vs. Sanjay Transport Agency, Ranigung

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the cross- appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 633/KOL/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Mar 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A No.567/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Sanjay Transport Agency............................................................................….. Appellant 41, N.S.B. Road, Raniganj – 713347. [Pan: Aavfs6659N] Vs. Acit, Circle-3(1), Asansol...............................................................…… …. Respondent I.T.A No.633/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Ito, Ward-3(1), Asansol............................................................................….. Appellant Vs. Sanjay Transport Agency...............................................................…… …. Respondent 41, N.S.B. Road, Raniganj – 713347. [Pan: Aavfs6659N] Appearances By: Shri Anil Kochar, Adv. & Shri Aryan Kochar, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Vivek Verma, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 10, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : March 13, 2023 आदेश / Order मनीष बोरड, लेखा सद"य "वारा / Per Manish Borad: The Above Captioned Appeal For Assessment Year 2010-11 Filed By The Assessee & Cross Appeal Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Asansol Both Dated 22.09.2020 Are Arising Out Of The Order U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Assessee In Ita No.567/Kol/2020 Has Taken The Following 2. Grounds Of Appeal:

Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

tried to make out his case for addition relying solely on the assessee statement recorded w/s 131 which does not have any evidentiary value as held in the case of S Khader Khan (2008) 300 ITR 157 (MAD) and affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal

Sanjay Transport Agency, Raniganj vs. ACIT, Cir. 3(1), Asansol

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the cross- appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 567/KOL/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Mar 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A No.567/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Sanjay Transport Agency............................................................................….. Appellant 41, N.S.B. Road, Raniganj – 713347. [Pan: Aavfs6659N] Vs. Acit, Circle-3(1), Asansol...............................................................…… …. Respondent I.T.A No.633/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Ito, Ward-3(1), Asansol............................................................................….. Appellant Vs. Sanjay Transport Agency...............................................................…… …. Respondent 41, N.S.B. Road, Raniganj – 713347. [Pan: Aavfs6659N] Appearances By: Shri Anil Kochar, Adv. & Shri Aryan Kochar, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Vivek Verma, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 10, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : March 13, 2023 आदेश / Order मनीष बोरड, लेखा सद"य "वारा / Per Manish Borad: The Above Captioned Appeal For Assessment Year 2010-11 Filed By The Assessee & Cross Appeal Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Asansol Both Dated 22.09.2020 Are Arising Out Of The Order U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Assessee In Ita No.567/Kol/2020 Has Taken The Following 2. Grounds Of Appeal:

Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

tried to make out his case for addition relying solely on the assessee statement recorded w/s 131 which does not have any evidentiary value as held in the case of S Khader Khan (2008) 300 ITR 157 (MAD) and affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal

Mumbai Shelter Housing Development Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC- 1(3), Mumbai

Appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 554/MUM/2023[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Baskaran B R, Am & Shri Amit Shukla, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 554/Mum/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Dcit Cc-1(3), Mumbai Shelter Housing Ito 10(2)(4), Room No. Development P.Ltd 213, 2Nd Floor, Aayakar 103, Kalpaka Chs Ltd, बिधम/ Bhavan, M.K.Road, Building No. 01, Road No. Vs. Mumbai - 400020 16, Siddharth Nagar No. 04, Goregaon (W), Mumbai- 400067 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : Shri Venugopal C. Nair अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Ms. Mahita Nair, Sr. Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 10.03.2023 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 10.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Amit Shukla: The Aforesaid Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Impugned Order Dated 17.02.2023, Passed By Ld.Cit (A)-47

For Respondent: Ms. Mahita Nair, Sr. AR
Section 143(3)Section 68

cash based on statement recorded on oath not appreciating statement cannot be recorded in oath during survey and that such statements have no evidentiary value and that the statement was retracted. Without Prejudice to the above. 4. The Learned CIT(A) and circumstances of the case and in law confirming

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Gurmeet Singh, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5758/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Mar 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 5559/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2006-07 Ita No. 5560/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2007-08 Ita No. 5561/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2008-09 Ita No. 5562/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2009-10 Ita No. 5563/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2010-11 Ita No. 5564/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2011-12 Ita No. 5565/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2012-13 Gurmeet Singh, Vs Dcit, C-168, Anand Vihar, Central Circle-20, New Delhi-110092 New Delhi-110002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaqps9561E Ita No. 5756/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2008-09 Ita No. 5757/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2009-10 Ita No. 5758/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2010-11 Acit, Vs Gurmeet Singh, Central Circle-8, C-168, Anand Vihar, New Delhi-110002 New Delhi-110092 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaqps9561E Assessee By : Sh. Gurdev Singh Chawla, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Paresh Johri, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 09.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 07.03.2023

For Appellant: Sh. Gurdev Singh Chawla, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Paresh Johri, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 234BSection 292CSection 68

addition only if the seized paper is self sufficient to make such an addition because section 292C cannot make good the deficiency of evidentiary value of the seized paper. The fundamental requirement that no addition can be made of the Act. 4. That on the facts and circumstances ... account of alleged receipts made simply on the basis of uncorroborated noting on loose papers made by some unidentified person and having no evidentiary value, is unsustainable. ITA No. 5565/Del/2016 : A.Y. 2012-13 Unsecured Loan- u/s 68: 33. During the year, the assessee received loans as under: S.No. Name

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Gurmeet Singh, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5757/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Mar 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 5559/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2006-07 Ita No. 5560/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2007-08 Ita No. 5561/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2008-09 Ita No. 5562/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2009-10 Ita No. 5563/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2010-11 Ita No. 5564/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2011-12 Ita No. 5565/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2012-13 Gurmeet Singh, Vs Dcit, C-168, Anand Vihar, Central Circle-20, New Delhi-110092 New Delhi-110002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaqps9561E Ita No. 5756/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2008-09 Ita No. 5757/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2009-10 Ita No. 5758/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2010-11 Acit, Vs Gurmeet Singh, Central Circle-8, C-168, Anand Vihar, New Delhi-110002 New Delhi-110092 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaqps9561E Assessee By : Sh. Gurdev Singh Chawla, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Paresh Johri, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 09.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 07.03.2023

For Appellant: Sh. Gurdev Singh Chawla, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Paresh Johri, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 234BSection 292CSection 68

addition only if the seized paper is self sufficient to make such an addition because section 292C cannot make good the deficiency of evidentiary value of the seized paper. The fundamental requirement that no addition can be made of the Act. 4. That on the facts and circumstances ... account of alleged receipts made simply on the basis of uncorroborated noting on loose papers made by some unidentified person and having no evidentiary value, is unsustainable. ITA No. 5565/Del/2016 : A.Y. 2012-13 Unsecured Loan- u/s 68: 33. During the year, the assessee received loans as under: S.No. Name

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Gurmeet Singh, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5756/DEL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Mar 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 5559/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2006-07 Ita No. 5560/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2007-08 Ita No. 5561/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2008-09 Ita No. 5562/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2009-10 Ita No. 5563/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2010-11 Ita No. 5564/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2011-12 Ita No. 5565/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2012-13 Gurmeet Singh, Vs Dcit, C-168, Anand Vihar, Central Circle-20, New Delhi-110092 New Delhi-110002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaqps9561E Ita No. 5756/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2008-09 Ita No. 5757/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2009-10 Ita No. 5758/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2010-11 Acit, Vs Gurmeet Singh, Central Circle-8, C-168, Anand Vihar, New Delhi-110002 New Delhi-110092 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaqps9561E Assessee By : Sh. Gurdev Singh Chawla, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Paresh Johri, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 09.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 07.03.2023

For Appellant: Sh. Gurdev Singh Chawla, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Paresh Johri, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 234BSection 292CSection 68

addition only if the seized paper is self sufficient to make such an addition because section 292C cannot make good the deficiency of evidentiary value of the seized paper. The fundamental requirement that no addition can be made of the Act. 4. That on the facts and circumstances ... account of alleged receipts made simply on the basis of uncorroborated noting on loose papers made by some unidentified person and having no evidentiary value, is unsustainable. ITA No. 5565/Del/2016 : A.Y. 2012-13 Unsecured Loan- u/s 68: 33. During the year, the assessee received loans as under: S.No. Name

Sh. Gurmeet Singh, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5565/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 5559/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2006-07 Ita No. 5560/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2007-08 Ita No. 5561/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2008-09 Ita No. 5562/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2009-10 Ita No. 5563/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2010-11 Ita No. 5564/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2011-12 Ita No. 5565/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2012-13 Gurmeet Singh, Vs Dcit, C-168, Anand Vihar, Central Circle-20, New Delhi-110092 New Delhi-110002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaqps9561E Ita No. 5756/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2008-09 Ita No. 5757/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2009-10 Ita No. 5758/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2010-11 Acit, Vs Gurmeet Singh, Central Circle-8, C-168, Anand Vihar, New Delhi-110002 New Delhi-110092 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaqps9561E Assessee By : Sh. Gurdev Singh Chawla, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Paresh Johri, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 09.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 07.03.2023

For Appellant: Sh. Gurdev Singh Chawla, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Paresh Johri, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 234BSection 292CSection 68

addition only if the seized paper is self sufficient to make such an addition because section 292C cannot make good the deficiency of evidentiary value of the seized paper. The fundamental requirement that no addition can be made of the Act. 4. That on the facts and circumstances ... account of alleged receipts made simply on the basis of uncorroborated noting on loose papers made by some unidentified person and having no evidentiary value, is unsustainable. ITA No. 5565/Del/2016 : A.Y. 2012-13 Unsecured Loan- u/s 68: 33. During the year, the assessee received loans as under: S.No. Name

Sh. Gurmeet Singh, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5564/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Mar 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 5559/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2006-07 Ita No. 5560/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2007-08 Ita No. 5561/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2008-09 Ita No. 5562/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2009-10 Ita No. 5563/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2010-11 Ita No. 5564/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2011-12 Ita No. 5565/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2012-13 Gurmeet Singh, Vs Dcit, C-168, Anand Vihar, Central Circle-20, New Delhi-110092 New Delhi-110002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaqps9561E Ita No. 5756/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2008-09 Ita No. 5757/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2009-10 Ita No. 5758/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2010-11 Acit, Vs Gurmeet Singh, Central Circle-8, C-168, Anand Vihar, New Delhi-110002 New Delhi-110092 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaqps9561E Assessee By : Sh. Gurdev Singh Chawla, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Paresh Johri, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 09.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 07.03.2023

For Appellant: Sh. Gurdev Singh Chawla, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Paresh Johri, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 234BSection 292CSection 68

addition only if the seized paper is self sufficient to make such an addition because section 292C cannot make good the deficiency of evidentiary value of the seized paper. The fundamental requirement that no addition can be made of the Act. 4. That on the facts and circumstances ... account of alleged receipts made simply on the basis of uncorroborated noting on loose papers made by some unidentified person and having no evidentiary value, is unsustainable. ITA No. 5565/Del/2016 : A.Y. 2012-13 Unsecured Loan- u/s 68: 33. During the year, the assessee received loans as under: S.No. Name

Sh. Gurmeet Singh, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5563/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Mar 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 5559/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2006-07 Ita No. 5560/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2007-08 Ita No. 5561/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2008-09 Ita No. 5562/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2009-10 Ita No. 5563/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2010-11 Ita No. 5564/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2011-12 Ita No. 5565/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2012-13 Gurmeet Singh, Vs Dcit, C-168, Anand Vihar, Central Circle-20, New Delhi-110092 New Delhi-110002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaqps9561E Ita No. 5756/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2008-09 Ita No. 5757/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2009-10 Ita No. 5758/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2010-11 Acit, Vs Gurmeet Singh, Central Circle-8, C-168, Anand Vihar, New Delhi-110002 New Delhi-110092 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaqps9561E Assessee By : Sh. Gurdev Singh Chawla, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Paresh Johri, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 09.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 07.03.2023

For Appellant: Sh. Gurdev Singh Chawla, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Paresh Johri, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 234BSection 292CSection 68

addition only if the seized paper is self sufficient to make such an addition because section 292C cannot make good the deficiency of evidentiary value of the seized paper. The fundamental requirement that no addition can be made of the Act. 4. That on the facts and circumstances ... account of alleged receipts made simply on the basis of uncorroborated noting on loose papers made by some unidentified person and having no evidentiary value, is unsustainable. ITA No. 5565/Del/2016 : A.Y. 2012-13 Unsecured Loan- u/s 68: 33. During the year, the assessee received loans as under: S.No. Name

Sh. Gurmeet Singh, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5562/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Mar 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 5559/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2006-07 Ita No. 5560/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2007-08 Ita No. 5561/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2008-09 Ita No. 5562/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2009-10 Ita No. 5563/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2010-11 Ita No. 5564/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2011-12 Ita No. 5565/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2012-13 Gurmeet Singh, Vs Dcit, C-168, Anand Vihar, Central Circle-20, New Delhi-110092 New Delhi-110002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaqps9561E Ita No. 5756/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2008-09 Ita No. 5757/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2009-10 Ita No. 5758/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2010-11 Acit, Vs Gurmeet Singh, Central Circle-8, C-168, Anand Vihar, New Delhi-110002 New Delhi-110092 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaqps9561E Assessee By : Sh. Gurdev Singh Chawla, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Paresh Johri, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 09.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 07.03.2023

For Appellant: Sh. Gurdev Singh Chawla, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Paresh Johri, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 234BSection 292CSection 68

addition only if the seized paper is self sufficient to make such an addition because section 292C cannot make good the deficiency of evidentiary value of the seized paper. The fundamental requirement that no addition can be made of the Act. 4. That on the facts and circumstances ... account of alleged receipts made simply on the basis of uncorroborated noting on loose papers made by some unidentified person and having no evidentiary value, is unsustainable. ITA No. 5565/Del/2016 : A.Y. 2012-13 Unsecured Loan- u/s 68: 33. During the year, the assessee received loans as under: S.No. Name