https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367589 In block assessment, seized material justified treating Rs. 42 crores received under a development rights arrangement as sale consideration and undisclosed income where the documents and surrounding conduct showed the so-called security deposit was used to defer tax liability. Additions based on a seized diary were not sustained because the entry was ambiguous and lacked independent corroboration. The cash-slip addition was mostly explained by cash-book and bank records, with only limited verification left open. Commission paid to Televista Electronics Limited was also not added as undisclosed income because it was recorded in the books and no fresh seized material showed it to be sham or outside the books. en-us Tue, 18 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 19 Jun 2026 14:07:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367589 In block assessment, seized material justified treating Rs. 42 crores received under a development rights arrangement as sale consideration and undisclosed income where the documents and surrounding conduct showed the so-called security deposit was used to defer tax liability. Additions based on a seized diary were not sustained because the entry was ambiguous and lacked independent corroboration. The cash-slip addition was mostly explained by cash-book and bank records, with only limited verification left open. Commission paid to Televista Electronics Limited was also not added as undisclosed income because it was recorded in the books and no fresh seized material showed it to be sham or outside the books. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 18 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367589