TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (3) TMI 171
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... has erred in giving part relief to the assessee and against the addition of Rs. 2,06,03,900, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has granted a relief of Rs. 59,87,250 and has erred in confirming the other addition, which is against the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. That the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in considering certain unauthenticated loose documents seized from the premises of some other party, which do not have the confirmation/signatures of the assessee, cannot be taken as conclusive evidence against the assessee for alleged transactions outside the books of account and the judgment of the hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Common Cause (A Registered Society) v. Union of India has b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....anufacturing, trading and dealing in all sorts of gold and diamond jewellery which is managed by the directors namely, Mr. Mangat Rai Jain, Mr. Gautam Jain and Mr. Vikram Jain. 5. Brief facts are that the additions contested by the assessee have been made by the Assessing Officer on the basis of search conducted on one party at "Batala" namely "M/s. Kartika Gold Enterprises" on March 14, 2012 and on the basis of certain documents seized from the "Batala" party, where on the basis of name of the assessee as mentioned in the seized documents, the additions have been made in the hands of the assessee on account of sales made by the assessee and remittances received by the assessee from M/s. Kartika Gold Enterprises. 6. The seized material fo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hat assessee and it is beyond comprehension how the assessee's closing stock could be made a part of a noting of a third party. Further, it was argued that such documents as seized are not as per regular books of account of that party, but notings made on rough paper at any given point of time and, therefore, the addition as made in the hands of the assessee on the basis of such unauthentic "computerized prints" have no evidenciary value and, therefore, the addition made in the hands of the assessee deserves to be deleted. 10. The main plea of the assessee is that how and when and at which point of time, such documents at pages 23 to 25 have been made by that party and, how, the tabulation of figures have been made against the name of ....