https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280573 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. en-us Fri, 20 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 11 May 2019 07:18:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280573 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. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 20 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280573