Facts of the Case :
The present case is related to search & seizure action carried out in case of Sh. S.K. Gupta (‘third party’) in respect of companies and other business entities which were controlled by him or owned by him or different individuals connected with him. The assessee was one such individual. During the assessment proceedings u/s 143(3) read with section 153A, AO not being satisfied with the explanations made by the assessee and based on extract of some hand written ledgers indicating name “Shri Anil Khandelwal’ seized from Sh. S.K. Gupta, made addition to the income of the assessee during A.Y. 2006-07 and A.Y. 2007-08.
Assessee filed the appeal before CIT(A) and contented that despite a simultaneous search operation carried in the case of assessee, no evidence whatsoever has been found which correlates with the impugned seized documents found from the premises of Shri S. K. Gupta, a third party. He also took the ground that Shri S. K. Gupta himself had denied the authorship/ownership of the impugned documents during his statement on 13/12/2006 and reiterated the same even during his cross examination by the appellant before the AO on 05/04/2012. Considering the submissions of the assessee and the statement of Shri S.K. Gupta specifically with respect to the entries which were attributed to the assessee, CIT(A) accepted the contention and directed for deletion of said addition. The revenue appeal was also rejected by the ITAT based on the reasoning of the CIT(A) as well as various Supreme Court decisions relevant to the present case. Aggrieved Revenue filed the appeal before Hon’ble High Court.
The question ‘whether the inference drawn on the basis of the material seized was sustainable?’ was answered in favour of the assessee having regard to the below mentioned factual nature of the dispute and having examined the findings of the lower authorities on this account which was not considered unreasonable, Hon’ble Court hold that no substantial question of law arises for consideration. The appeals are devoid of merit and are consequently dismissed.
Factual Findings and decisions relied upon
Case laws relied