Third-party seized document cannot sustain addition without possession, corroboration, or proof linking it to the assessee.

A seized computer printout recovered from a third party could not, by itself, sustain an addition against another assessee where the document was not found in the assessee's possession or control, bore no handwriting or signature of the assessee, and was unsupported by any adverse statement or corroborating material. Section 292C presumption was held inapplicable on these facts because the presumption attaches to the person from whose possession the document is recovered. The addition was treated as resting on conjecture and suspicion rather than cogent incriminating evidence, so the deletion by the first appellate authority was upheld in favour of the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether an addition could be sustained against the assessee solely on the basis of a computer printout seized from a third party, and whether the statutory presumption under section 292C could be invoked in the absence of possession, authorship, corroboration, or an adverse statement.

Analysis: The seized paper was found from the premises of a third party and not from the assessee's possession or control. The document did not bear the assessee's handwriting or signature, and no adverse statement of the person from whose premises it was seized supported the alleged transaction. In these circumstances, the presumption under section 292C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was held inapplicable against the assessee. The addition was further found to rest on conjecture and suspicion without cogent incriminating material, and the burden to connect the document with the assessee was not discharged. The legal principle applied was that a presumption from possession attaches to the person from whom the document is recovered, and an assessment cannot stand on mere suspicion without corroborative evidence.

Conclusion: The addition was not sustainable and the deletion made by the first appellate authority was upheld in favour of the assessee.

Ratio Decidendi: A presumption arising from a seized document can be drawn only against the person from whose possession it is recovered, and a third-party document cannot justify an addition against another person absent independent corroboration and proof linking the document to that person.

---