During course of search and seizure  a diary was seized from office premises of assessee-company, a part of said group. Aassessee surrendered an amount towards bogus bills booked during various years in its books of account. AO  held that company had made unexplained investments in various capital assets by incurring expenditure in cash and treated unexplained investment/expenditure as income of assessee from undisclosed sources, and brought same to tax under head other sources.  AO adopted a self-suiting approach and had accepted part of contents of seized document, i.e., to extent same revealed that assessee had made investment towards construction/furnishing of hotel building, however, he had whimsically declined to take cognizance of fact that said investment, as per said seized document, was sourced from cash that was received back by assessee against payments made towards bogus purchases. CIT (A) partly deleted the addition. On appeal by revenue and cross appeal by the assessee, the Tribunal held that approach adopted by AO was not justified and held that contents of a seized document  are to be read in toto, and it is not permissible on part of an AO to dissect same and therein summarily accept same in part and reject other part.  and  deleted the addition . (AY. 2011-12)