https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=57463 Seized papers containing only figures, initials and allocations could not support additions as secret profits in the firm's hands because the Department failed to prove what the entries represented or establish a nexus with the assessee-firm. Mere recovery of the papers did not establish taxable income, and the material did not exclude alternative explanations such as a separate venture or association of persons. The presumption under section 132(4A) was confined to the search context and could not, by itself, justify additions in regular assessment under section 143(3). In the absence of independent corroboration, the additions were held unsustainable. en-us Wed, 23 Dec 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 10 Dec 2010 12:44:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=57463 Seized papers containing only figures, initials and allocations could not support additions as secret profits in the firm's hands because the Department failed to prove what the entries represented or establish a nexus with the assessee-firm. Mere recovery of the papers did not establish taxable income, and the material did not exclude alternative explanations such as a separate venture or association of persons. The presumption under section 132(4A) was confined to the search context and could not, by itself, justify additions in regular assessment under section 143(3). In the absence of independent corroboration, the additions were held unsustainable. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 23 Dec 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=57463