https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444922 The HC held that the ITAT erred in deleting additions based on seized documents during search operations. The court emphasized that under Section 292C, once the AO makes a presumption regarding seized documents, the burden shifts to the assessee to disprove the facts. The ITAT incorrectly placed the burden on Revenue to prove handwriting and allowed the assessee to retract earlier admissions without proper examination. However, the court noted the AO should have interrogated the accountant who prepared the documents rather than the assessee directly. The matter was remanded to ITAT for reconsideration within six months. en-us Thu, 19 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 10 Jun 2024 10:47:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444922 The HC held that the ITAT erred in deleting additions based on seized documents during search operations. The court emphasized that under Section 292C, once the AO makes a presumption regarding seized documents, the burden shifts to the assessee to disprove the facts. The ITAT incorrectly placed the burden on Revenue to prove handwriting and allowed the assessee to retract earlier admissions without proper examination. However, the court noted the AO should have interrogated the accountant who prepared the documents rather than the assessee directly. The matter was remanded to ITAT for reconsideration within six months. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 19 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444922