Vikas Vilas Rasal Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai)
Summary: Mumbai Bench of the ITAT deleted an addition of ₹66.82 lakh made as undisclosed income solely on the basis of WhatsApp chats recovered during search proceedings, holding that electronic evidence without a valid certificate under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act has no evidentiary value. The Tribunal observed that the Revenue failed to produce any corroborative evidence such as cash seizure, bank trail, books of account, third-party confirmation, or independent enquiry linking the assessee with the alleged unaccounted cash transactions involving one Vilas Pawar. It further noted that neither the assessee’s name nor his family members’ names appeared in the chats and the addition was based merely on assumptions and suspicion. Relying on decisions including Saravana Selvarathnam Retails (P.) Ltd. v. CIT and ACIT v. Prashant Prakash Nilawar, the Tribunal held that unauthenticated digital conversations unsupported by independent evidence cannot form the sole basis for additions under the Income-tax Act.
Core Issue: Whether an addition for undisclosed income can be sustained solely on the basis of WhatsApp chats recovered during search proceedings when (i) no certificate under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 was furnished, and (ii) no independent corroborative evidence such as cash seizure, bank trail, books of account, or third-party confirmation was brought on record.
Comments are closed.