S. 153C : Assessment of income of other person-Addition on basis of loose papers / diaries seized from third party-No reference to assessee by name-Identification only on basis of code “DD”, mobile data, WhatsApp chats and Truecaller-Not permissible-No incriminating material “belonging to” or “relating to” assesse- Jurisdiction u/s. 153C not valid-Addition of ₹32.14 crore deleted. [S. 69, 69A, 69C, 132, 132(4A), 292C]
The assessee filed return declaring income of ₹54.94 lakh. Pursuant to search in Triton Group, certain diaries and digital material were seized from a third party (Shri Jiten Pujari). The Assessing Officer invoked section 153C alleging that entries referring to “DD” represented cash transactions aggregating to ₹32.14 crore belonging to the assessee. The linkage was sought to be established through mobile contacts saved as “DD Personal”, WhatsApp chats, SMS data and Truecaller identification. The CIT(A) quashed the proceedings holding that the seized material neither belonged to nor related to the assessee.
On appeal by the Revenue, dismissing the appeal, the Tribunal held that the assumption of jurisdiction u/s 153C was invalid. The seized diaries were admittedly found from a third party and did not contain the name, address or any identifiable particulars of the assessee. The entire case of the Revenue rested on the presumption that the code “DD” referred to the assessee. However, even the author of the diaries explained that “DD” was only a code used for high-value transactions and did not identify the assessee. The attempt of the Assessing Officer to establish identity through mobile data, WhatsApp chats and Truecaller was held to be tenuous and unreliable. Data from crowd-sourced applications like Truecaller lacks evidentiary sanctity. Loose sheets and private diaries of third parties, without independent corroboration, cannot be relied upon against the assessee. Presumptions under sections 132(4A) and 292C apply only to the person from whose possession documents are found and cannot be extended to third parties. The doctrine of human probabilities cannot substitute absence of evidence. In absence of any cogent nexus between the seized material and the assessee, the jurisdictional condition of section 153C was not satisfied. Accordingly, the proceedings were held to be void ab initio and the addition was deleted. Appeal of the Revenue dismissed. (AY. 2020–21) (ITA No. 2173/Mum/2025, dt 20.04.2026)
DCIT (Central ) v. Sunetra Ajit Pawar (Mrs.) (Legal Heir of Late Shri Ajit Anantrao Pawar) v. DCIT (Mum.)(Trib.) www.itatonline.org .
[Coram : Hon’ble Shri Amit Shukla, JM & Hon’ble Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar, AM]