https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=56245 Addition of undisclosed income could not be sustained on a loose paper seized from a third party's residence because the document did not name the assessee and the supporting statements were inconsistent; the statutory presumption under section 132(4A) could not be extended against a person from whom the paper was not seized, so the addition was deleted. The estimated "on money" addition for the balance project area also failed because it was based on presumptions drawn from one disputed transaction, while the record showed confirmations from other purchasers and cheque payments; block assessment requires search material and corroborative evidence, so this addition was likewise deleted. en-us Wed, 30 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 02 Dec 2010 16:22:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=56245 Addition of undisclosed income could not be sustained on a loose paper seized from a third party's residence because the document did not name the assessee and the supporting statements were inconsistent; the statutory presumption under section 132(4A) could not be extended against a person from whom the paper was not seized, so the addition was deleted. The estimated "on money" addition for the balance project area also failed because it was based on presumptions drawn from one disputed transaction, while the record showed confirmations from other purchasers and cheque payments; block assessment requires search material and corroborative evidence, so this addition was likewise deleted. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 30 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=56245