Loose papers and diary notings cannot sustain additions without proof of Hundi borrowing or books of account entries.

ITAT Indore held that additions based on loose papers, diary entries and seized notings could not be sustained under sections 68 or 69D without proof of a Hundi transaction, books of account, or corroborative evidence. Section 69D applies only where borrowing on a Hundi is established, and section 68 requires a credit entry in books of account; here, no Hundi was found and the seized diary and loose sheets were not books of account. The Tribunal also found that mere suspicion or third-party notings could not justify the alleged advance and interest receipt. The Revenue's appeal failed and deletion of the additions was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether additions made on the basis of loose papers, diary entries and seized documents could be sustained under section 69D or section 68 when no Hundi was found, the entries were not shown to be in the nature of books of account, and no corroborative evidence established the alleged advance and interest receipt.

Analysis: The Revenue's case rested on notings in seized material suggesting advance of money and receipt of interest. The record showed, however, that no Hundi, either live or discharged, was found, the seized diary and loose sheets were not books of account within the meaning of the Act, and the entries were not supported by independent evidence. The Tribunal applied the settled principle that section 69D can be invoked only where borrowing on a Hundi is established, and that section 68 requires credit entries in books of account. It also relied on the absence of any corroborative material and held that additions cannot rest on mere suspicion or third-party notings.

Conclusion: The additions were not sustainable; the Revenue's appeal failed and the deletion of the additions was upheld.

Final Conclusion: The assessment additions based on the seized loose papers and diary entries were rejected for want of proof of Hundi borrowing and for absence of books of account and corroborative evidence.

Ratio Decidendi: Sections 68 and 69D cannot be invoked unless the Revenue establishes, with supporting evidence, that the impugned credit represents a Hundi transaction or a credit entry in books of account; loose sheets, diaries and uncorroborated notings are insufficient.

---