DCIT Vs Pioneer Finest Limited (ITAT Delhi)
ITAT Delhi held that merely seizure of share certificate cannot be considered as incriminating material on its own unless other corroborative evidence are found during the search. Accordingly, appeal of the department dismissed.
Facts- Department has preferred the present appeal. It is contended that the additions have been made based on the original copies of share certificates allotted by the Assessee Company which were found at the premises of P. Minda Group Company instead of investor Company premises and the Ld. A.O. made addition based on the share certificate and the statements of the entry operator, which are the incriminating materials, therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) committed error in deleting the addition made by the A.O. in all the Assessment Years.
Conclusion- Held that the CIT(A) committed no error in observing that merely seizure of share certificate cannot be considered as incriminating material on its own unless other corroborative evidence are found during the search.
Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in CIT v. Harjeev Aggarwal has held that statements recorded during a search and seizure operation under Section 132(4) of the Act cannot be the sole basis for computing undisclosed income unless corroborated by evidence found during the search.
