Dimple Shailesh Jain Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai)
The ITAT Mumbai adjudicated a group of appeals involving identical issues arising from search and seizure proceedings conducted on the Rubberwala Group on 17.03.2021. During the search, statements of key individuals, including an employee handling shop sales in “Platinum Mall,” were recorded, and an Excel sheet containing alleged cash and cheque transactions was retrieved from a pen drive. Based on this material, proceedings were initiated under Section 153C against various assessees, including the present case, where the assessee had purchased a shop in the mall.
The Assessing Officer made an addition of ₹5,00,000 as unexplained investment under Section 69, alleging payment of “on-money” over and above the recorded sale consideration. This conclusion was primarily based on the Excel sheet, statements of the employee, and admission by the promoter of the group regarding receipt of cash and declaration of 8% income on such amounts. The assessee denied making any cash payment and contended that no incriminating material directly linked her to such alleged transactions.
The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the addition both on legal and factual grounds. However, before the Tribunal, the assessee argued that the Excel sheet was not authenticated, not shared, and lacked details such as date, source, and authorship. It was further contended that no corroborative evidence, such as cash vouchers, receipts, or signed documents, was found linking the assessee to any cash payment. The assessee also highlighted denial of cross-examination of persons whose statements were relied upon.
