Vikas Agarwal Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi)
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Delhi, adjudicated three appeals filed by the assessee against orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for assessment years 2014–15, 2015–16, and 2016–17. These appeals arose from assessments framed under Section 153A read with Section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act following a search conducted on 05.02.2017.
The primary issue in all three assessment years concerned additions made by the Assessing Officer (AO) on account of alleged undisclosed interest income based on entries found in a seized diary marked as Annexure A-5. The AO treated the entries as representing undisclosed income and made additions of Rs.19,25,300 for AY 2014–15, Rs.42,12,800 for AY 2015–16, and Rs.46,05,100 for AY 2016–17. The assessee contended that the diary belonged to his deceased father and was not in his handwriting, and that entries continued even after the father’s death. It was further argued that the assessee, being a member of a joint family, could not be solely attributed ownership of the document, especially when there were other legal heirs. The assessee also described the diary as a “dumb document” lacking evidentiary value.
The Tribunal examined whether the additions could be sustained solely on the basis of such documents. It noted that the assessee was part of a joint family and that documents found during a search cannot automatically be attributed exclusively to one individual without further evidence. It also took into account that the Revenue had not established that the handwriting in the diary belonged to the assessee or that he had knowledge of its contents. The Tribunal emphasized that merely relying on statutory presumptions under Section 292C, which presumes ownership of documents found during search, is insufficient unless supported by corroborative inquiry linking the document to the assessee.
