TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2005 (3) TMI 20
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y correct to hold that the assessee has successfully discharged its initial onus to prove that the paper found and seized from its premises does ot belong to it and the contents thereof do not relate to the assessee in any way?" The present Reference relates to the Assessment Years 1983-84. 3.Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present Reference are as follows:- 4.The respondent assessee has been assessed to income tax in the status of a registered firm. It is engaged in the money lending business on pawn broking and pledges. It had declared the income at Rs.25,843/-. Its premises were searched on 27th October, 1983 when a paper was found and seized from the debris in the shop premises. The said paper contained the entries ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... does not bear the name of the assessee or any one else. It is not in the handwriting of any of the partners or employees of the assessee as per replies submitted by the assessee in response to the show cause dated 9.9.1985 issued by the I.T.O. In relation to the aforesaid seized paper, the assessee clearly stated that the said paper does not belong to the assessee firm or its partners or any connected person. He also explained that this is written in english and none of the partners or employees of the firm know english. The assessee further submitted that no unaccounted assets belonging to the assessee firm were found during the course of search. It was stated that the said seized paper neither belonged to him nor the entries recorded the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of aforesaid statements recorded in the year 1984. Even after receiving the assessee's entries dated 27.9.1985 and 3.3.1987, the I.T.O. did not choose to examine the partners or the employees of the assessee firm in relation to the aforesaid seized paper. The paper found and seized from the premises of the assessee nowhere contains any description that this represents the amount of loan given by the assessee to any person. After receiving the reply from the assessee in response to the show cause notice dated 9.9.1985 the minimum effort which was expected of the learned assessing authority was to record the statement of the partners and the employees and thereafter conclusively prove that the said seized paper belonged to the assessee and th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g period 12-7-1982 to 12-9-1982 has been worked out. This indicates that the figure of Rs.1,35,000 recorded in the seized paper cannot be said to represent an unexplained investment made in the financial year 1982-83. On this account also, the addition made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the CIT(A) deserves to be cancelled. 4.6. Taking an overall view of the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the addition of Rs.1,35,000 and Rs.14,645 should be cancelled, and the additions therefore deleted." 6.We have heard Sri Shambhu Chopra, learned Standing Counsel for the Revenue and Sri V.K.Agrawal, learned counsel for the respondent-assessee. 7.Learned Standing Counsel submitted that the paper was seized f....