https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=59569 In block assessment, additions could not rest solely on a general search disclosure, a managing director's affidavit, or a section 132(4) statement without corroborating seized material establishing the quantum of undisclosed income. Although Chapter XIV-B could cover false or inflated expenditure claims in principle, the assessed amount still had to be grounded in search evidence, so ad hoc or proportionate estimation was impermissible on the facts. A 25 per cent restriction borrowed from another case was also rejected because the precedent involved a materially different factual setting and no reliable evidentiary basis supported the percentage adopted. The additions were therefore deleted. en-us Fri, 28 Nov 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 06 Dec 2023 19:23:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=59569 In block assessment, additions could not rest solely on a general search disclosure, a managing director's affidavit, or a section 132(4) statement without corroborating seized material establishing the quantum of undisclosed income. Although Chapter XIV-B could cover false or inflated expenditure claims in principle, the assessed amount still had to be grounded in search evidence, so ad hoc or proportionate estimation was impermissible on the facts. A 25 per cent restriction borrowed from another case was also rejected because the precedent involved a materially different factual setting and no reliable evidentiary basis supported the percentage adopted. The additions were therefore deleted. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 28 Nov 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=59569