https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64062 ITAT (third-member majority) held that additions based solely on a seized loose document were not sustainable. The JM deleted the additions in the assessee's individual assessment and, consequently, the HUF's protective additions were also deleted. The AM dissented, proposing a reduced addition based on partial payments reflected in statements, but the third member agreed with the JM that no reliable evidence showed cash changed hands or that the seized entry represented actual investments. Both appeals were allowed and the file was to be placed before the Division Bench to record the majority view. en-us Tue, 22 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 27 Sep 2025 12:17:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64062 ITAT (third-member majority) held that additions based solely on a seized loose document were not sustainable. The JM deleted the additions in the assessee's individual assessment and, consequently, the HUF's protective additions were also deleted. The AM dissented, proposing a reduced addition based on partial payments reflected in statements, but the third member agreed with the JM that no reliable evidence showed cash changed hands or that the seized entry represented actual investments. Both appeals were allowed and the file was to be placed before the Division Bench to record the majority view. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 22 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64062