Assessee was also one of members of the wherein search and seizure action was initiated . In course of search, certain material by way of loose sheets were found and seized. Statement of assessee was recorded under S.  132(4) in which he disclosed certain additional income by way of expenditure on house construction, stock jewellery and debtors/advances . The AO  completed assessment and levied penalty on basis of loose sheets found and statement of assessee .  CIT (A) affirmed the order of the AO. On appeal the  assessee contended that he had surrendered income just to buy peace and avoid unnecessary litigation and there was no iota of evidence that surrendered income was undisclosed income of assessee . It was noted that from entries in alleged seized material, it was found that most of them were unrealistic and these were not entries representing real and actual transactions . The Tribunal held that tough admission on part of assessee was a relevant evidence, however, when entries/notings in loose papers were apparently not representing real transactions then it was incumbent upon department to find out and establish existence of these assets in possession of assessee . In absence of such efforts and even any question put to assessee regarding existence of these assets, these entries alone would not ipso facto constitute undisclosed income of assessee . Accordingly penalty  was deleted  ( AY. 2014 -15)