In a major ruling reinforcing principles of evidence-based taxation, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Nagpur Bench, has overturned tax additions totaling ₹2.66 crore made against three assessees on the basis of unverified third-party documents. The case involved allegations of “on-money” (unaccounted cash) receipts in a property transaction, which were ultimately dismissed by the tribunal for lack of corroborative evidence and procedural fairness.
Case Background
The appellants—Taradevi Babulal Patni, Patni Housing Pvt. Ltd., and Babulal Roshanlal Patni—faced additions under Section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which deals with unexplained money. The case originated from a search and seizure operation on Soni Maloo, Talda, and Panapliya groups. During the operation, authorities recovered loose documents indicating possible cash payments totaling ₹1.58 crore related to a property deal.
AO’s Allegation
Based on these seized documents, the Assessing Officer (AO) alleged that:
-
The assessees received unaccounted cash (“on-money”) as part of a real estate transaction.
-
Additions were made as follows:
-
₹39.62 lakh each to Taradevi Babulal Patni and Babulal Roshanlal Patni
-
₹1.87 crore to Patni Housing Pvt. Ltd.
-
These additions were upheld by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), prompting the assessees to file an appeal with the ITAT.
ITAT’s Observations & Ruling
The ITAT bench made the following key observations:
🧾 1. Third-party Documents Lack Verifiability
The documents used by the AO were loose papers seized from unrelated third parties. These papers were neither signed by the appellants nor directly linked to them.
🧍♂️ 2. No Cross-Examination Opportunity
The appellants were not granted the opportunity to cross-examine the individuals from whom the documents were seized—violating principles of natural justice.
🧩 3. No Independent Corroboration
No independent or direct evidence (such as bank statements, admissions, or other documentation) was presented to prove the actual receipt of cash by the appellants.
As a result, the tribunal ruled that additions based solely on unverified third-party documents are not sustainable in law.
💬 “Reliance solely on unverified, unauthenticated documents, without proper corroboration or allowing cross-examination, is legally untenable.” — ITAT, Nagpur Bench
Legal Takeaway
This ruling reaffirms some fundamental principles under Indian tax jurisprudence:
-
Evidence must be direct, relevant, and verifiable.
-
Additions under Section 69A cannot be sustained without corroborative proof.
-
Natural justice, including the right to cross-examine, must be upheld in tax proceedings.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
Q1: What is “on-money” in tax terms?
It refers to unaccounted cash or black money received in addition to the documented transaction value—often in property deals.
Q2: What is Section 69A of the Income Tax Act?
Section 69A deals with unexplained money, investments, or valuables found in possession of a person but not accounted for in their books.
Q3: Can loose papers be considered valid evidence?
Not without verification, authenticity, and proper linkage to the assessee. Courts often disregard such documents if they are uncorroborated.
Q4: Why is cross-examination important in tax cases?
It is a legal right ensuring fairness. Without it, the assessee cannot defend against third-party allegations effectively.
Conclusion
The ITAT’s decision to strike down ₹2.66 crore in tax additions sets a significant precedent in protecting taxpayers from arbitrary assessments based solely on unverified third-party records. It underscores the importance of due process, verifiable evidence, and fair hearings in income tax proceedings.
Leave A Comment