Advertisement
Advertisement
Skip to content
Follow Us on
Advertisement
TOP STORIES
Income Tax

ITAT Mumbai Deletes Section 69 Addition Based Solely on Uncorroborated Third-Party Statements

Case Law Details

TaxGuru Citation
2026 taxguru.in 10129
Case Name
Manish Kashiprasad Seksaria Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi)
Date of Judgement/Order
Only available for paid members
Related Assessment Year
2017-18
Advertisement

Manish Kashiprasad Seksaria Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi)

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Mumbai Bench “D”, comprising Shri Om Prakash Kant (Accountant Member) and Shri Rahul Chaudhary (Judicial Member), decided three appeals filed by the assessee for Assessment Years 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2019-20 against the common order dated 09.08.2025 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-52. Since the issues involved in all three appeals were common, they were heard together and disposed of by a consolidated order.

The appeals arose from proceedings initiated under Section 153C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 following a search and seizure operation under Section 132 conducted on 17.03.2021 in the case of the Rubberwala Group, including M/s Rubberwala Housing & Infrastructure Ltd. (RHIL). During the search, the Revenue alleged that the assessee had purchased a shop in “Platinum Mall”, Girgaon, Mumbai, and had paid a total cash component of ₹12,64,050 over and above the recorded consideration. The alleged cash payments were attributed to different assessment years as follows:

  • A.Y. 2017-18: ₹2,00,000
  • A.Y. 2018-19: ₹6,58,600
  • A.Y. 2019-20: ₹4,05,450

On the basis of the material allegedly recovered during the search, proceedings under Section 153C were initiated against the assessee.

The Revenue relied primarily on statements recorded during the search, particularly that of Shri Imran Ansari, an employee handling sale and registration of shops in Platinum Mall. According to his statement, the sale consideration consisted of both banking channel payments and cash components, with the allocation allegedly decided by Shri Tabrez Shaikh, Director/CMD of RHIL. The Revenue also relied upon a 16 GB pen drive recovered from Shri Imran Ansari’s residence, which was stated to contain Excel sheets recording alleged cash components received from purchasers. Shri Imran Ansari also stated that purchasers making cash payments were taken to Shri Abrar Ahmed, who received the cash and informed him so that the Excel records and diaries could be updated.

Paid content

Become a Basic or Premium Member, or log in if you are already a Basic or Premium member.

Advertisement

Author Info

CA Sandeep Kanoi
Qualification: CA in Job / Business
Company: Taxguru Consultancy
Location: Mumbai, Maharashtra
Articles Published: 20,004

Join TaxGuru's Network for the latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.