On appeal to the Tribunal, it was observed that the amounts written in the said loose paper does not bear any objective details on identity of recipients and is quite vague and muted. There is no post search enquiry conducted after the statement of MGP. The Tribunal further observed that the AO is not entitled to make pure guesses while making an assessment just on the basis of bare suspicion and the presence of a clinching evidence is necessary to make any addition under section 153C. Thus, the Tribunal quashed the additions of amounts unaccounted cash receipts in the hands of the assessee. (AY. 2013-14)
Kantibhai P. Patel v. DCIT (2021) 211 TTJ 187 // 208 DTR 54 (Ahd.)(Trib.)/Chhotalal P.Patel v. Dy .CIT (2021) 211 TTJ 187/ 208 DTR 54 (Ahd) ( Trib)Chhotalal P.Patel v. Dy .CIT (2021) 211 TTJ 187/ 208 DTR 54 (Ahd) ( Trib)
S. 153C : Assessment-Income of any other person-Search-Addition in the hands of third person based on information obtained during search and seizure proceedings-Primary onus on revenue to prove falsehood of the assessees submissions-No addition can be made merely on basis of suspicion-cogent material required to make addition. [S. 132(4)]