TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1991 (4) TMI 187
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....inite as to what happened to those papers, however according to the AAC they were seized by the ITO at the time of the survey. At this juncture it may be mentioned that such seizure was unauthorised since the income-tax authority had no power to impound any document under s. 133A. These loose papers were made use of during the course of assessment proceedings for the asst. yr. 1981-82 for which the assessment was framed on the 14th March, 1984 i.e. to say nearly after 3 1/2 years of the survey. In the explanation dt. 27th Jan., 1984 it was stated by the assessee that these papers had got no connection with his business. It was indicated in the explanation that sometimes farmers use to come to his accountant for calculation of their personal....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e AAC of Income-tax. The AAC deleted the entire addition of Rs. 78,021. The Department came in appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal held that the AAC of Income-tax did not properly deal with the matter in the light of the assessment order and the submissions of the assessee. The Tribunal, therefore, by order dt. 11th March, 1987 in ITR No. 810/Ind/84 set aside the order of the AAC with a direction to decide the appeal afresh. The AAC decided the appeal afresh by order dt. 30th Dec., 1987. He held that Annexure A bearing name of Shri Dalpat Sampat did not belong to the assessee. He therefore deleted the addition of Rs. 44,703 (It should be Rs. 46,103). He further held that in the Annexure B the entries amounting to Rs. 10,000 and Rs. 1,2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ned by, or to be in the handwriting of any particular person are in that person's handwriting. This provision contained in s. 132(4A) exists in complete isolation of other provision of the Act. This cannot be stretched to the provisions contained in s. 133A. Even if any attempt is made to stretch the said provision contained in s. 132(4A),it needs to be borne in mind that its intent and purpose is restricted to the provisional adjudication contemplated under s.132(5) and not beyond. In this connection, reference may be to Pushkar Narain Sarraf vs. CIT (1990) 86 CTR (All) 110 : (1990) 183 ITR 388 (All). That apart, the expression 'may presume' appearing in s. 132(4A) dose convey the same meaning as has been assigned to the similar expression....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....isers and so also of money lending. Naturally, his customers were mostly agriculturists. It was explained by him that the agriculturists used to come to his accountant for getting prepared their personal accounts and they might have left their papers at his shop at the seat of the accountant. One of such papers (Annexure A) bore the name of Shri Dalpat Sampat. If such papers were lying in a shop without any care and in a condition not indicating intention to preserve them, possession thereof cannot be imputed to the assessee. Under the circumstances brought out in this case, the assessee cannot be burdened with the onus to explain the contents thereof. 5. It deserves mention that the ITO did not even care to know as to in whose handwriti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....de as to whom such sale related. The ITO did not even specify as to which entries in Annexures A he took into account for reaching the conclusion that there was advancement of loan of Rs. 41,400 and an income of interest of Rs. 4,703. The other papers marked as Annexure B to D simply indicate some calculation of interest from certain date to certain date. Such calculation sheets without any indication have no probative value. Nothing can be made out therefrom. One cannot be permitted to draw freely any and every presumption unsupported by reason. It is necessary to bear in mind that the presumptions of fact are nothing more than logical inference of the existence of one fact drawn from the other proved or known facts without the help of mer....