TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (2) TMI 1558
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the case and in law. 2 The Ld.CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition Rs. 10,39,38,614/- made towards unexplained investment in the purchase of property, evidenced by the entries found in material seized in the locker belonging to third party. 2.1. The Ld.CIT(A) failed to appreciate that both the buyers and sellers admitted in their sworn statements cheque payments mentioned in the loose sheets as true and correct and they are related to land transaction. But denial of cash payments with respect to such land transaction made in the same loose sheets is not acceptable. 2.2 The Ld.CIT(A) failed to appreciate that there are clear notings in the loose sheet that "Cash paid" "already cash paid" "Paid" "Balance cash" and "Cheque" and it clearly indicates that the payments were made in both cash and cheque in the said land transaction. 2.3 The CIT(A) failed to appreciate that there are entries in multiple loose sheets with different calculations. Some of the entries in different loose sheets such as name, amount paid both in cash and cheque are tallying with calculations. This proves evidentiary value of entries in loose sheets. 2.4 The Ld. CIT(A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as Annexure ANN/VG/CP/LS/S. The same allegedly contained information related to the present assessee. Accordingly, the return of income was subjected to scrutiny u/s 153C. 3.2 Shri C. Pandian, in sworn statement, stated that the loose sheets contained details about the settlement of various civil suits of their clients being dealt with by Senior Advocate Shri S. Senthil and the said sheets were given to him by Shri S. Senthil for safe-keeping. Shri S. Senthil filed submissions on 09-11-2018 and stated that the notings in the loose sheets were with regard to his clients and related to some partition deed. As per the details furnished by Shri C. Senthil, summons was issued to various persons as mentioned in the loose sheets and their statements were also recorded. The loose sheets numbered 01 to 16 were shown to these persons who stated that the same pertained to their land transactions. The said loose sheets contained both purchase payments including advance payment made in respect of the said property. In their sworn statements, they admitted that amount of banking transactions as reflected therein was received by them. They further stated that the loose sheets numbered 3,4,5,6,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... cash for Rs. 16.34 Crores was brought to tax in the proportion of Cheque payments by the assessee and his wife. The assessee' proportionate share worked out to be Rs. 10.39 Crores which was added as unexplained investments in the hands of the assessee. The proportionate share of wife was also added in similar manner while framing assessment for her. Aggrieved, the assessee assailed the assessment before first appellate authority. Appellate Proceedings 4.1 The assessee assailed the impugned addition so made by Ld. AO by way of elaborate written submissions which has been extracted in the impugned order. The assessee, inter-alia, submitted that the loose sheets contained the names of vendors (from whom the land was purchased by the assessee) along with some other names and some scribbled numbers with no narration. Some of the numbers tallied with the amounts paid by way of cheques. The loose sheets contained some unconnected persons' name also with huge amount written against those names. None of the loose sheets carried any date or name of the assessee or description / attributes of land so purchased to establish the nexus of the assessee with these transactions. In terms of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ntained both cheque and cash payments and the cheque payments were exactly matching with the sale deed. It was finally concluded that the noting mentioned in the loose sheet were genuine in nature because other than the cash payments as mentioned in the loose sheets, all other noting were accepted by both the sellers and buyers. 4.4 The Ld. CIT(A) considered the contents of loose sheets and after going through the same, rendered a finding that other than the property transactions, there were narration about other names against whom certain amounts were noted. The Ld. AO merely filtered some amounts and correlated it with the property transaction made by the assessee and her spouse. Since the cheque payments matched with the payments made by the assessee and her spouse with the property purchased by them, Ld. AO arrived at a conclusion that the amount narrated is the excess amount paid over and above the sale consideration paid by way of cheque. However, as against this, the stand of the assessee was that the loose sheet did not contain any signatures, dates, or clear context, more particularly the name of the assessee and her spouse. In the absence of such critical details, the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... said entries. This was as per the decision of Hon'ble Jabalpur Tribunal in the case of ACIT Vs Satyapal Wassan (supra). Similar was the ratio of various other decisions as narrated in para 6.3.26 of the impugned order. 4.6 The Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Riveria Properties Private Limited Vs ITO (ITA No.250/Mum/2013) held that Ld. AO was required to bring further evidence to show that the money had actually exchanged between the parties in a case where there was no other evidence on record to prove that on-money was paid except the loose sheet found in the premise of a third-party and admission made by the third-party. 4.7 The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of K.P Varghese Vs. ITO (131 ITR 597) held that the onus of establishing that the conditions of taxability were fulfilled would always be on the revenue and throwing the burden of showing that there was no under-statement of consideration on the assessee would be to cast an almost impossible burden upon him to establish the negative, namely, that he did not receive any consideration beyond what has been declared by him. Thus, the burden would be on revenue to adduce proper evidence to corroborate the contents of the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....legal dispute on the land purchased by the assessee. Thus, statements of these persons negate the allegations made by Ld. AO. It could also be seen that as per the details furnished by Shri Senthil, summons was issued to various persons as mentioned in the loose sheets and their statements were also recorded. The loose sheets numbered 01 to 16 were shown to these persons who confirmed having received the cheque amounts which has also been confirmed by the assessee and his wife. However, none of the person has made any admission of exchange of on-money on the land transactions. The impugned additions are merely on deduction by Ld. AO that since cheque payments were tallying, the other payments as mentioned therein must also have exchanged between the parties to the transaction. However, except for this deduction, there is no corroborative material with Ld. AO to support the aforesaid allegations. None of the party has made any admission of exchange of on-money. 6. The findings of Ld. CIT(A) are that the loose sheets contain some unconnected persons' name also with huge amount written against those names. None of the loose sheets carried any date or name of the assessee or descrip....