TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (11) TMI 1264
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd C.O. NO. 38/DEL/2016 for the Assessment Year ('AY') 2007-08. 2. Learned counsel for the Revenue states that ITAT erred in deleting the addition of Rs.34,06,11,102/- without analysing and considering the contents and the words of the seized document, identified in the appeal as page no. 5 of Annexure A-1 ('Seized Document'). He states that as per the said Seized Document the Vasant Square Mall was acquired by the Assessee for Rs.32,85,37,354/- before 1st October 2006, which was undisclosed in the Income Tax Return ('ITR') of the Assessee. He states that the ITAT erred in deleting the addition of Rs.1.20 Crores on account of receipt of rent, without considering that the amount of rent pertaining to period from 1st October 2006 to 31st Mar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Mr. Lalit Modi on 19th June, 2009 and consequently, proceedings under Section 153C of the Act were initiated against the Assessee and assessment was framed vide order dated 29th December, 2011 at the total income of Rs.4,70,97,930/-. 6. Subsequently, on the basis of the Seized Document found during the search of Mr. Lalit Modi, the AO issued a Section 148 notice dated 28th March, 2014 on the basis of the satisfaction recorded. The ITAT has returned a finding that AO based on the seized Annexure A-1 (page no. 5) alone, without any further investigations, made additions and passed the impugned assessment order. 7. The ITAT has held that the additions made by the AO are factually incorrect, illegal and arbitrary. The finding of the ITAT rea....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... i.e. page no. 5 of Annexure A-1[Seized Document]. The ITAT observed that no fresh material has been taken into account by the AO for reopening the assessment under Section 147 of the Act. The relevant finding of the ITAT reads as under: "..... In the present case, though there was search in case of assessee on 29/04/2008 pursuant to which Assessing Officer initiated action u/s. 153A of the Act, in the absence of any incriminating material, returned income was accepted vide assessment order u/s. 153A dtd. 29/12/2010. But because of the search in case of Mr. Modi and Annexure -1 found therein, the addition was made in the present case. The entire basis for making the additions to the assessable income of the Assessee was a single documen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....efurther presumption in Section 292C(1)(ii) would stand attracted viz., that the contents of the document should be presumed to be true. His submission was that the said presumptions have not been rebutted by the Assessee and, therefore, whatever was said in the document should be taken to be sufficient proof of concealment of the income by the Assessee. 27. The Court is unable to accept the above submission of Mr.Shivpuri. The Court in this regard notices that the detailed interrogation of Mr. Modi revealed the source of the document and the fact that Mr. Modi was not the author of the document. Mr. Modi had suggested that it was some other broker who had given him the said document as a 'proposal'. There appears to have been no attempt ....